2025 archived consultation: Hearings and Indicative Sanctions guidance

This consultation was previously hosted on our consultation hub. We have moved it here as part of archiving.

We asked

As part of the GOC’s ongoing commitment to improvement, last year, the GOC, consulted on proposed changes to its Hearings and Indicative Sanctions Guidance to improve clarity for Fitness to Practise Committees (FtPCs) when considering applying sanctions in order to maintain transparency and trust in the fitness to practise process.  

We sought feedback and views from a range of stakeholders about the consultation including professional bodies, public bodies, membership organisations and others, including the Professional Standards Authority (PSA). 

We carried out structural and editorial improvements to make the guidance clearer and easier to navigate.  

We are grateful for the stakeholder feedback that we received and have made the following updates to our Hearings and Indicative Sanctions Guidance. 

You said

We received a total of 15 responses. Stakeholders provided the following feedback:

  • Add further clarity and an explanation of hearsay.
  • Further guidance for FtPCs to consider situational vulnerability.
  • Consider a more “balanced” approach to dishonesty by citing additional case law in the guidance.
  • Update the 'Review Hearings' section to include information about when a review would be appropriate.
  • Consider separate sanctions for impaired fitness to practise from misconduct of a sexual nature and impaired fitness to practise from a conviction for sexual misconduct. 
  • Further guidance on sexual motivation due to a risk of this not being alleged.

We did

In response to the feedback received, we have:

  • Set out a clear definition of hearsay, including examples to support FtPCs when applications rely on hearsay evidence. 

  • Included an explanation of factors such as situational vulnerability and special measures that might support vulnerable witnesses in providing best evidence.   

  • Made minor edits to the language to reflect a more balanced approach to dishonesty.  

  • Updated the section on Review Hearings to better reflect circumstances where a Review Hearing might be required.   

  • Provided clearer definitions to distinguish between sexual harassment and sexual motivation. 

Files