Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service 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 Thomas Herbst, doctor (General Medical Council 3270242).
Decision date: 24 September 2025 · Hearing started 24 September 2025
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal considered a misconduct case for Thomas Herbst. It recorded the decision on impairment as impaired and directed erasure from the medical register. The source PDF contains the tribunal's published reasons, with any private material redacted where required.
Charges
The MPTS PDF background states: 3. Dr Herbst qualified in 1988. He worked as a Locum Consultant Anaesthetist at various sites in London and the surrounding area. At the time of the events, Dr Herbst was practising as a consultant anaesthetist at South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre at Epsom General Hospital, Epsom and St Helier University Hospital NHS Trust (‘the Hospital’). The January 2024 Tribunal 4. A Medical Practitioners Tribunal hearing took place between 3 to 12 January 2024 (‘the January 2024 Tribunal’). 5. The January 2024 Tribunal found that, on 27 September 2022, Dr Herbst attended work when he was unfit to do so. It found that Dr Herbst had been asleep whilst in charge of an anaesthetised patient in an operating theatre at the Hospital and could not be easily roused. It also found that, during the incident, he had been speaking incoherently and had been unsteady on his feet. The January 2024 Tribunal found that, at the time of the incident, Dr Herbst had been subject to a warning for similar conduct in 2020. Record of Determinations – Medical Practitioners Tribunal MPT: Dr HERBST 3 6. The January 2024 Tribunal considered that falling asleep during a procedure on a patient under anaesthesia was a serious matter and Dr Herbst’s actions amounted to serious professional misconduct. 7. When considering sanction, the January 2024 took into account Dr Herbst’s evidence and
Findings
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal considered a misconduct case for Thomas Herbst. The detail page records impairment as impaired and the tribunal directed erasure from the medical register.
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.