Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Suspended from practice — 8 months
The regulator’s term: suspension
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Olusola Sanusi, doctor (General Medical Council 7487959).
Decision date: 26 November 2025 · Hearing started 17 November 2025 and ended 26 November 2025
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Sanusi wrote a private prescription on 1 August 2024 while knowing her licence to practise had been withdrawn for failure to revalidate. The tribunal found this was dishonest and that her fitness to practise was impaired. It noted limited insight and that she had not accepted the dishonesty finding. An 8-month suspension was imposed with a review hearing directed.
Charges
The GMC alleged that on 2 April 2024, Dr Sanusi was notified that her licence to practise had been withdrawn following a failure to revalidate, that she must not work in any role requiring a licence to practise, and that she must stop such work immediately. The GMC further alleged that on 1 August 2024, Dr Sanusi wrote a private prescription for Patient A for atorvastatin and fluticasone furoate, knowing her licence to practise had been withdrawn and that she required a licence to practise in order to prescribe, and that this was dishonest. Dr Sanusi was present for the first four days of the hearing and absent thereafter.
Findings
The Tribunal found the disputed allegations proved. It determined that Dr Sanusi's fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct. It found she had limited insight, noting she had not accepted her actions were dishonest and had failed to be completely open and honest in her oral evidence. An 8-month suspension was imposed with a review hearing directed. No immediate order was sought by the GMC or imposed.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Dr Sanusi had no previous fitness to practise history and was of previous good character. There was no evidence of repetition since August 2024. The incident was a single, isolated occurrence with no evidence the actions were undertaken for profit or personal gain. Personal and family stressors were present at the time. No harm was caused and the potential risk to the public was low.
Aggravating factors
Dr Sanusi had not apologised for her conduct and had not accepted that her actions were dishonest. She failed to be completely open and honest in her oral evidence. The dishonesty was undertaken in the course of professional practice.
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.