HCPC determination — substantive 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 Christopher Gyiripah, radiographer (HCPC RA76626).
Decision date: 13 February 2026 · Hearing started 9 February 2026 and ended 13 February 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel decided that Christopher Gyiripah should be subject to the published outcome from a final 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: . 68. The Panel carefully considered the submissions of Ms Khaile on behalf of the HCPC and Mr Higgs on behalf of the Registrant. The Panel accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor. 69. The Panel was mindful that this was a matter for the Panel’s professional judgement, there being no standard or burden of proof. 70. The Panel took into account that misconduct was defined in Roylance v General Medical Council (no 2) [2001] 1 AC 311 as: “a word of general effect, involving some act or omission which falls short of what would be proper in the circumstances. The standard of propriety may often be found by reference to the rules and standards ordinarily required to be followed by a (medical) practitioner in the particular circumstances”. In the case of Nandi v GMC [2004] EWHC 2317 (Admin), the court stated that: “The adjective ‘serious’ must be given its proper weight, and in other contexts there has been reference to conduct which would be regarded as deplorable by fellow practitioners”. 71. The Registrant made unwanted sexual advances to two female colleagues, which, in relation to Particular 2a, amounted to a sexual assault. He was in a position of power over these colleagues which he exploited for his own sexual gratification in breach of professional boundaries. 72. The Registrant’s conduct made his colleagues feel intimidated, insecure and at risk of further unwanted advances. It was likely to have had a detrimental impact on their ability to perform their duties and thereby potentially undermined their ability to provide care for patients and service users. In addition, there was evidence that a number of colleagues refused to work shifts with the Registrant, thereby potentially reducing the operational capacity of the Department. 73. The Panel considered that the...
Findings
The HCPTS page records a final hearing for Christopher Gyiripah by the Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The allegation section states: . 68. The Panel carefully considered the submissions of Ms Khaile on behalf of the HCPC and Mr Higgs on behalf of the Registrant. The Panel accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor. 69. The Panel was mindful that this.... 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.