Dental Professionals Hearings Service determination — substantive hearing

GDC imposes conditions on Mariya Rosneva over treatment planning and consent failings

The GDC committee imposed 12 months of conditions after finding clinical and consent failings involving one patient. The separate record-keeping allegations were not proved.

MedicWatch editorial · Published 9 July 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026

Conditions on practice (practising with restrictions) — 1 year

Data last checked: 22 September 2026Report a correction

What does “practising with restrictions” mean?

Conditions of practice allow the practitioner to keep working but only subject to specific restrictions — for example, supervision, limits on certain procedures, or required reporting to the regulator.

Concerning Mariya Danyova Rosneva, dentist (General Dental Council 217616).

Decision date: 9 July 2026 · Hearing started 6 July 2026 and ended 9 July 2026

In plain English

The GDC tribunal decided that Mariya Rosneva should practise under conditions for 12 months after finding failings in periodontal assessment, treatment planning and informed consent for one patient. It found her fitness to practise impaired because remediation remained incomplete. The separate record-keeping allegations were not proved, despite her admissions. The conditions require an approved workplace reporter, further development and audits, with immediate conditions covering the appeal period.

Charges

The allegations concerned care provided to one patient between 12 January 2023 and 5 June 2024: inadequate periodontal assessment; proposing clinically inappropriate linked bridgework and crowns; failing to explain relevant risks and treatment options; inadequate records; and failure to obtain informed consent.

Findings

The committee found the clinical-care allegations and failure to obtain informed consent proved. Although Rosneva admitted the record-keeping allegations, it found those allegations not proved because it had found that the underlying assessments and discussions did not occur. It found misconduct and current impairment, concluding that insight and remediation remained incomplete and recent learning had not been shown to be embedded in practice. It imposed 12 months of conditions, with a review before expiry, including a development plan, an approved workplace reporter, quarterly reports and audits. The conditions address assessment, treatment planning, consent and periodontal care. Immediate conditions apply from deemed service; the substantive order takes effect after the 28-day appeal period unless appealed.

Mitigating factors

In relation to mitigating factors, the Committee is mindful that you made some admissions to the facts that the Committee found proved, and that there have been no further reported instances of these or other matters. You have taken steps to avoid repetition. The Committee is also mindful that an amount of time has elapsed since the time of the incidents giving rise to these proceedings, and that you have shown some insight into your misconduct. You have engaged in these proceedings.

Aggravating factors

In relation to aggravating factors, the Committee notes that your acts and omissions entailed a real risk of harm to patients. Whilst you have no previous FTP findings, it notes the GDC advice letter of October 2014 relating to an incident of a single patient involving treatment planning and record keeping. There was also a risk of harm to Patient A, and a limited insight into the identified concerns.

Source

All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Dental Professionals Hearings Service 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.