HCPC determination — review 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 Mark William Stokes, operating department practitioner (HCPC ODP14875).
Decision date: 20 January 2026 · Hearing started 20 January 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel decided that Mark William Stokes should be subject to the published outcome from a review hearing. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The public page records the profession, registration number, allegation, finding, order, notes and hearing history for source verification.
Charges
The HCPTS allegation section states: took place between 25 and 27 February 2025. The Registrant did not attend the hearing, which proceeded in his absence. The panel conducting the hearing heard evidence from two witnesses from the Trust, the Matron in the Trauma and Orthopaedics Department and the Deputy Matron in Theatres. The conclusion of the panel was that the HCPC had proved to its satisfaction particulars 1 and 2(a). While it accepted the evidence that the Registrant had not attended the Trust’s disciplinary process, it decided that particular 2(b) was not proven on the basis the HCPC did not prove that the Registrant had been under an obligation to attend it. 18. When it considered whether the proven facts constituted misconduct, the final hearing panel stated that it had decided that the Registrant had breached the following standards of the HCPC’s Standards of conduct, performance and ethics promulgated in 2016, namely: Standard 2.6, “You must work in partnership with colleagues…” Standard 2.8, “You must treat your colleagues in a professional manner showing them respect and consideration.” Standard 9.1, “You must make sure that your conduct justifies the public’s trust and confidence in you and your profession.” Standard 9.6, “You must co-operate with any investigation into your conduct or competence …” 19. The panel also referred to the evidence of the two witnesses from the Trust who have already been identified, quoting extensively from the evidence they gave about the operational and financial consequences occasioned by it not being known whether cover would be needed for an absent member of theatre staff. 20. The final hearing panel expressed its conclusion on the issue of misconduct in paragraph 68 of its written determination, which was in the following terms: “The Panel was satisfied...
Findings
The HCPTS page records a review hearing for Mark William Stokes by the Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The allegation section states: took place between 25 and 27 February 2025. The Registrant did not attend the hearing, which proceeded in his absence. The panel conducting the hearing heard evidence from two witnesses from the Trust, the Matron in the.... The order section states: comes into effect..
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published HCPC 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.