Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — review hearing
MPTS tribunal finds Dr Charles Anigala no longer impaired over dishonesty about patient referral
A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service review has found Dr Charles Anigala's fitness to practise no longer impaired, allowing his suspension to expire. He was suspended in 2025 for dishonesty over a false claim that he had contacted a neurosurgery team about a patient who later died.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 27 May 2026 · Updated 8 July 2026
No impairment found
Added to MedicWatch: 8 July 2026Report a correction
What does “no impairment found” mean?
The regulator considered the case and found that the practitioner's fitness to practise was not currently impaired. No restrictions are imposed.
Concerning Charles Anigala, doctor (General Medical Council 6039186).
Decision date: 27 May 2026 · Hearing started 27 May 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Anigala's fitness to practise is no longer impaired by reason of misconduct. At this review hearing it considered a suspension imposed after he dishonestly claimed to have contacted a neurosurgery team about a patient, and made a false retrospective note, following the patient's discharge and later death. The tribunal was satisfied he had completed targeted remediation, including on record keeping, developed his insight and posed a negligible risk of repetition. It concluded he was no longer impaired and directed that his existing suspension run until it expired.
Charges
This was a review of a suspension imposed for misconduct. At the 2025 Tribunal, Dr Anigala admitted the allegation. On 16 October 2023, Patient B attended an emergency department and, after reviewing a CT scan whose radiologist report advised neurosurgical referral, Dr Anigala determined the patient was suitable for discharge; Patient B died two days later. When later asked by a clinical lead whether he had contacted the neurosurgery team, Dr Anigala falsely stated that he had and that they had advised the patient did not need to be transferred, which he knew to be untrue as he had not contacted a neurosurgical registrar. He also made a false retrospective note for the patient's records recording that contact. The 2025 Tribunal found his conduct deliberate and dishonest, an attempt to deflect error away from himself, amounting to serious misconduct.
Findings
Dr Anigala's registration had been suspended for four months by the 2025 Tribunal and for a further two months by a March 2026 review, which found his fitness to practise still impaired and asked him to demonstrate insight, particularly into record keeping. At this review hearing, the Tribunal considered his further reflections, targeted CPD including a record-keeping course, oral evidence and supportive correspondence from colleagues, including a letter confirming the Trust had found no dishonesty in a separate attendance-record issue. The Tribunal was satisfied that Dr Anigala had focused his insight and remediation, had done what the March 2026 Tribunal asked, and had now remediated his behaviour with developed insight. It determined that the risk of repetition was negligible and that the risk to public protection had been removed across all three limbs. The Tribunal concluded that Dr Anigala's fitness to practise is no longer impaired by reason of misconduct, and directed that the existing suspension remain in place until it expired on 12 June 2026.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal 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.