GPHC determination — substantive hearing
Struck off the register
The regulator’s term: erasure
What does “struck off the register” mean?
Being struck off (the regulator calls this "erasure") removes the practitioner from the register. They are no longer permitted to practise this profession in the UK. Erasure can be reviewed after a minimum of five years, but is otherwise indefinite.
Concerning Sithembile Sibanda, pharmacist (GPHC 2220573).
Decision date: 23 December 2024 · Hearing started 16 December 2024 and ended 23 December 2024
In plain English
The GPhC committee decided that Sithembile Sibanda should be subject to the published outcome from a principal hearing in a misconduct case. The committee directed removal from the register. It records fitness to practise as impaired. The official determination gives the committee's reasons, order wording, and any conditions attached to the decision.
Charges
The GPhC allegation section states: You, a registered pharmacist (2220573): 1. On or before 2 February 2023, submitted two CPPE clinical assessments which had not been completed under the supervision of a clinical mentor or clinical supervisor; and, 1.1. The two case-based discussion assessments you submitted to CPPE (CbD1 and CbD2) were different from those on record with the clinical mentors who undertook those assessments with you; 1.2. The clinical supervisor you listed on your two MR-CAT assessments, Colleague A, did not complete those assessments with you. 2. Your actions in 1 were dishonest in that you: 2.1. Knew that the two-based discussion assessments you submitted to CPPE (CbD1 and CbD2) were different from those on record with the clinical mentors who undertook those assessments with you; 2.2. Knew that the clinical supervisor you listed on your two MR-CAT assessments, Colleague A, did not complete those assessments with you. 3. During your employment with The Northamptonshire Health NHS Foundation Trust, you provided incorrect reasons as to why you were uncontactable during a period of sick leave in that you: 3.1. informed Colleague B on 31 October 2022 that it was due to your personal and work phone being damaged by a water leak at Rushden Medical Centre. 4. Your actions in 3 and 3.1 were dishonest in that you: 4.1. Knew that the explanation provided was untrue; 4.2. Intended to mislead Colleague B. 5. In an end of probation meeting with Colleague C on 18 April 2023, you provided inaccurate information in that you: 5.1. stated that your last day working for The Northamptonshire Health NHS Foundation Trust was 07 April 2023. 6. Your actions in 5 and 5.1 were dishonest in that you; 6.1. Knew that you left with The Northamptonshire Health NHS Foundation Trust on 10 January 2023, and had not...
Findings
The GPhC Fitness to Practise Committee held a principal hearing for Sithembile Sibanda in a misconduct case. The cover page records facts proved: 1, 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 3, 3.1, 4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 6.1, 6.2, 7, 9, 9.1, 9.2, 10, 11 Facts proved by admission: None Facts not proved: 7.1, 7.2, 8. It records fitness to practise as impaired. The committee directed removal from the register.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published GPHC determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.