Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e:
JOHN HOWELL QC
(Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)
Between:
THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF THE NURSING AND MIDWIFERY COUNCIL
Claimant
v
SILVESTER
Defendant
Computer‑Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
165 Fleet Street London EC4A 2DY
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7404 1424
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr N Jeffs (instructed by the NMC) appeared on behalf of the Claimant
The Defendant did not appear and was no represented
J U D G M E N T
THE DEPUTY JUDGE: This is an application by the Nursing and Midwifery Council under article 31(8) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order for an extension for a period of 9 months from January 2 2015 of the interim suspension order made against Mr Ian Charles Silvester on July 3 2014 by the Council's Practice Committee on the grounds that the extension is necessary for the protection of members of the public and it is otherwise in the public interest.
The principles governing such an extension are set out in the General Medical Council v Dr Stephen Chee Cheung Hiew [2007] EWCA Civ 369, [2007] 1 WLR 2007, at [31] to [33].
On September 14 2011 the Respondent was made the subject of a Risk of Sexual Harm Order that prevents him from having contact with anyone under the age of 16 without the express permission of their parent or guardian until September 13 2021. That order was imposed by the court on the ground that the Respondent had engaged in sexual activity on at least two occasions. The order was confirmed in July 2012.
The Nursing and Midwifery Council received a referral from the Disclosure and Barring Service disclosing that order in June 2013. It considers that the Respondent's fitness to practice to be impaired by his misconduct. The suspension is said to be required, even though the order is in force, to prevent the Respondent being able to obtain employment giving him access to young and vulnerable patients (given the serious nature of the conduct and the period of time over which it occurred) and to maintain public trust and confidence in the profession. It appears that the Respondent accepted that the order was in the public interest at the interim orders hearing.
The Respondent is currently appealing against the Risk of Sexual Harm Order for the second time. The Nursing and Midwifery Council were informed of that appeal in July 2014. The case against him, which is otherwise ready for a substantive hearing, has been placed on hold pending the conclusion of that appeal. It is anticipated that it will be determined within the next few months, although no date has been fixed.
I have considered the effect of a further extension on the Respondent. However, bearing in mind the nature of the allegations, the Order to which the respondent is in any event now subject and the fact that his solicitors have consented to an extension of nine months, I have reached the conclusion both that the extension and the period of the extension is justified in the circumstances. I will make the order in the draft form which has been handed up.