Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
No impairment found
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 Neill Garrard, doctor (General Medical Council 6159385).
Decision date: 23 January 2026 · Hearing started 7 January 2026 and ended 23 January 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that none of the allegations against Dr Neill Garrard were proved. The allegations concerned alleged inappropriate physical contact with one patient and inappropriate conduct during a consultation with a second patient. This was a remittal hearing ordered by the High Court. The tribunal concluded all charges were not proved, the fitness to practise impairment stage was not reached, and the case was concluded with any interim order revoked.
Charges
Dr Garrard faced allegations of misconduct arising from two separate patient consultations: touching Patient A in a sexual manner and making inappropriate comments during an A&E attendance on 27 March 2021, and asking Patient B to undress inappropriately and engaging in controlling behaviour during a consultation at Lewisham Hospital on 27 December 2021. The allegations included that his actions were sexually motivated and carried out without the patients' consent. This was a remittal hearing following a successful appeal by the Professional Standards Authority to the High Court.
Findings
The Tribunal found that none of the allegations were proved. All charges relating to both Patient A and Patient B were determined and found not proved, including the allegations of inappropriate physical contact, inappropriate requests to undress, and sexual motivation. The Tribunal determined that the impairment stage was not reached and revoked any interim order on Dr Garrard's registration with immediate effect.
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If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.