Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing

Paramedic struck off after serious clinical and communication failures

The panel found that serious failings in patient care had not been adequately remedied. It ordered striking off, while dismissing or rejecting several individual allegations.

MedicWatch editorial · Published 16 July 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026

Erasure (struck off the register)

Data last checked: 22 September 2026Report a correction

What does “struck off the register” mean?

The regulator directed removal from the register in this decision. The decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions. Check the official register for the practitioner's current registration status.

Concerning Nathan Lees, paramedic (Health and Care Professions Council PA48119).

Decision date: 16 July 2026 · Hearing started 13 July 2026 and ended 16 July 2026

In plain English

The panel ordered paramedic Nathan Lees to be struck off after finding serious clinical and communication failures while working in Gibraltar. Several allegations were dismissed or not proved. Although the panel recognised limited insight and reported improvements, it found insufficient evidence that serious clinical failings had been remedied and considered the repetition risk high. A separate interim suspension covers the appeal period before the striking-off order takes effect.

Charges

Allegations concerned inadequate assessment and treatment, failure to manage a patient's airway during cardiac arrest, incomplete clinical records, failure to offer pain relief and unprofessional communication with or about patients and colleagues while working in Gibraltar in 2022.

Findings

The panel found serious misconduct in clinical care, assessment, record-keeping and communication. It dismissed particulars 1b, 1c and 4 after no evidence was offered, found the allegation concerning Patient H not proved, and did not find that the registrant prevented a colleague from managing Patient D's airway; his own failure to provide airway management was proved. The panel found current impairment on personal and public grounds. It recognised some limited insight, remorse and reported remediation, but found no adequate independent evidence that the serious clinical failings had been addressed and considered repetition risk high. It ordered striking off from the order's operative date. A separate interim suspension of up to 18 months covers the appeal period; the earlier decision not to impose an interim order at the adjourned facts stage was superseded by this final decision.

Mitigating factors

a) The Registrant has demonstrated limited insight, remorse and remediation.

Aggravating factors

a) The repeated issues over a period of time; b) Service User harm was caused; c) The lack of genuine recognition by the Registrant of the seriousness of the concerns raised; d) Failure to work in partnership with colleagues; e) Failure to raise concerns; f) The vulnerability of service users requiring emergency Paramedic care.

Source

All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions Council 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.