Prepared for Unknown User. © ICLR 2026

R (Anaesthetists United Ltd and others) v General Medical Council

Hearings

England & Wales

05 Sep 2025 [2025] EWHC 2270 (Admin); [2025] WLR(D) 491, KBD (Lambert J)

Subject Matter

MEDICAL PRACTITIONER — Policy guidance — Lawfulness — Statutory regulator promulgating single set of guidance on professional standards applicable to both doctors and non-medically qualified members of associate professions — Regulator electing not to make specific policy on limits of practice or supervision of non-medically qualified associates or explicit policy that non-medically qualified associates required to identify themselves as such — Whether decisions of regulator contrary to statutory objectives — Whether decisions irrational — Medical Act 1983 (c 54), s 1(1A) — Anaesthesia Associates and Physician Associates Order 2024 (SI 2024/374), art 3

[2025] EWHC 2270 (Admin); [2025] WLR(D) 491, KBD

AI Summary & Issues

Content generated by AI, as supplied by Jurisage. Learn more about AI Case Summaries.

In The King v General Medical Council, the High Court dismissed claims from Anaesthetists United Ltd and Chestertons regarding the regulation of Physician Associates and Anaesthesia Associates. The court upheld the GMC's approach, finding it rational and supported by extensive consultations. It concluded that the lack of strict practise limits aligned with the GMC's regulatory model, rejecting the claimants' concerns about patient safety, informed consent, and supervision.

Issues

Did the defendant fail to impose adequate limits on the practise of associates, thereby compromising patient safety and the regulatory framework established by the 2024 Order?
Was the defendant's decision-making process regarding the regulation of associates rational, given the evidence of systemic risks and the need for clear supervision and delegation standards?
Did the defendant adequately address the issue of informed consent by ensuring that patients were aware they were being treated by associates rather than qualified doctors?

Commentary

UK Human Rights Blog
Physician and Anaesthesia Associates: Delegation, Informed Consent, and Montgomery in the Administrative Court Case comment

Subscribe or Register to access the full case information page. Registered users can access three Law Reports, three case information pages and perform three Case Genie searches per month. If you already have an ICLR account please log in. For other queries or to request a free trial please contact ICLR.

MoJ users should log in here.