Struck off Leeds doctor applies to lift his 10-year-old ban

A former Leeds registrar who was struck off 10 years ago - after pocketing more than £31,000 from the NHS when he should have been on unpaid study leave - has applied to lift his ban.
Dr Christopher Lamming previously worked as a specialist registrar a Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust.Dr Christopher Lamming previously worked as a specialist registrar a Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust.
Dr Christopher Lamming previously worked as a specialist registrar a Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust.

Dr Christopher Lamming will next week face the Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal in a bid to have his name reinstated on the medical register.

He was struck off in 2007 after the tribunal’s predecessor, the General Medical Council’s (GMC) fitness to practice panel, ruled his conduct had been “dishonest, unprofessional and likely to bring the medical profession into disrepute”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The panel had heard Dr Lamming, now 49, who worked as a specialist registrar for the Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, took a study break in America between January and November 2000. His leave should have been unpaid but, due to an administrative error, the Trust shelled out £31,275.80 in salary to Dr Lamming over the 11-month period.

By the time his case came before the GMC seven years later, he had only repaid £8,750 of the cash. The panel also found his dishonesty had been “compounded” by a letter he had written to the Trust in March 2001, claiming the money was “funding” for his study break.

Dr Lamming’s tribunal hearing next week is not his first attempt to lift the ban.

In 2008, he appealed the GMC’s ruling at London’s High Court when his lawyers argued the decision was “disproportionate and Draconian”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

They said he had not initiated the payments and that his clinical abilities had never been questioned.

But judge Richard Inglis dismissed the argument and said a substantial sum of public money was involved and the panel had found he was fully aware he should not have received it.

The Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal in Manchester is expected to begin hearing the case on February 6.