On 22 July 2026, Aidan Eardley KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, dismissed a claim by Dr Dean Patterson (“the Doctor”) challenging a decision of the Interim Orders Tribunal (“IOT”) of the General Medical Council (“GMC”) to suspend him from practice for 12 months while his fitness to practise is investigated: see Patterson v General Medical Council [2026] EWHC 1877 (Admin). Stephen Kosmin successfully acted for the GMC.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Doctor developed concerns about the response of public health authorities in Guernsey and elsewhere, and the safety of vaccines that were developed to combat the disease. In particular he developed a concern that the vaccines may have caused cardiac damage in patients, in particular myocarditis and pericarditis. He posted/re-posted material connected with his concerns on social media. This social media activity was prolific and continued despite requests for its cessation. A number of investigations into the Doctor were conducted, including by the Royal College of Physicians. Ultimately, the Doctor was referred to the IOT. Following a hearing, the IOT made an interim suspension order. The IOT concluded that there was sufficient information before it that it could not formulate conditions which would adequately address the identified risks.
The Doctor’s claim challenging the IOT’s decision was dismissed by the Administrative Court. The judgment contains a detailed analysis of (i) the statutory scheme and role of the IOT under the Medical Act 1983; (ii) the role of the Court under s.41A(10) of the Medical Act 1983; and (iii) the IOT’s broad discretion to suspend, rather than impose conditions. That decision was held to be quintessentially a matter for the IOT’s own expert judgment.
The judgment is also of wider interest for public lawyers for applying the Court of Appeal’s recent analysis of relevant considerations in R (Gould) v Devon County Council [2026] EWCA Civ 687.
A copy of the judgment is available here. Stephen Kosmin was instructed by the GMC.
