Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Erasure (struck off the register)
Added to MedicWatch: 7 July 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 Salah-ud-Din Taj, doctor (General Medical Council 7641233).
Decision date: 12 June 2026 · Hearing started 8 December 2025 and ended 12 June 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Salah-ud-Din Taj had criminal convictions in Australia for 14 offences over four months, including a threat to kill, stalking and breaching court orders. It also found he dishonestly failed to declare these convictions when applying to the GMC in 2018 and to an NHS trust in 2019, and misrepresented his work history. The tribunal decided his fitness to practise was impaired and erased his name from the medical register.
Charges
Dr Taj was convicted on 9 March 2016 at the Magistrates Court of Victoria, Melbourne, of 14 offences committed over about four months, including persistent contravention of contact and intervention orders, contravening bail conditions, stalking, committing an indictable offence while on bail, making a threat to kill, and using a carriage service to menace and harass, receiving a 12-month Community Correction Order. It was further alleged, and admitted, that he dishonestly failed to declare these convictions when applying for GMC registration in May 2018 and on a North Cumbria University Hospitals NHS Trust declaration form in November 2019, and that he dishonestly misrepresented his employment history on his GMC application.
Findings
The Tribunal found all facts proved, determining that Dr Taj acted dishonestly in answering 'No' to the conviction question on his GMC application, in misstating his employment history, and in the statement he made on the North Cumbria Trust form. It found his fitness to practise impaired by reason of both his conviction and his misconduct, assessing the risk to public protection as medium for the conviction and high for the dishonesty, and citing a persistent lack of insight and limited remediation.
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.