Adjournment and trial in absence of accused
Where application for adjournment of disciplinary proceedings was made very late and was not supported by any medical evidence the chairman was right in giving it short shrift. However the disciplinary committee was wrong to decide to proceed in the absence of the appellant, who it was aware maintained that he was unable to attend through illness and who, it must have known, disputed the allegation of misconduct.
Yusuf v The Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain  EWHC 867 (Admin), in which the learned judge applied the case of R v Hayward  EWCA Crim 168,  1 QB 862, approved on appeal by the House of Lords, sub nom R v Jones (Anthony)  UKHL 5,  1 AC 1, and applied to the disciplinary proceedings of professional bodies by the Privy Council in Tait v The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons  UKPC 34.
5th Edition » | Chapter 10