Decisions of the English, Scottish and Irish courts under the Medical Acts 1858 to 1886 and the Dentists Act 1878 : collected for the General Medical Council and arranged with introduction and notes / by Charles J. S. Harper.

  • Harper, Charles John Stewart.
Date:
1912
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Decisions of the English, Scottish and Irish courts under the Medical Acts 1858 to 1886 and the Dentists Act 1878 : collected for the General Medical Council and arranged with introduction and notes / by Charles J. S. Harper. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Leeds Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Leeds Library.

    141/444 page 81
    who was registered may recover his fees, because he undoubtedJy may. Then, when, in addition to that, we look at the provision that the College may by bye-laws forbid any of their members to sue, it is in its very terms a proviso upon something. It is not a substantive provision that any College of Physicians may prevent _ their members from suing, but it is some qualification or proviso upon that which goes immediately before. What is that but a proviso upon the previous enactment that physicians may sue ? Therefore, taking into account that that proviso mani- festly shows that the section does apply to physicians, it seems to me that the result is this : that though the Act says in words persons may sue, it says, in effect, the old presumption of the relation betweeii physician and patient shall not apply; but that the physician works like anybody else, namely, with a right to be paid a reasonable remuneration. On that ground, therefore, I think that the plaintiff is entitled to recover. Rule discharged. Ex Parte LA MEET 1863. Nov. 24 [33 L. J. (Q. B.) 69] Keported also : 4B. &S. 582; 9L. T.410; 12 W. E., 201. See also Minutes of General Medical Council: Vol. II. (1863) 158, 353, 354. Mandamus, When it lies—Medical Register, Removal from— Poiver of General Council of Medical Education—21 & 22 Vict c. 90, s. 29. Under the 21 & 22 Vict. c. 90, s. 29 the General Council of Medical Education and Registration are sole fudges of ivhether a registered medical practitioner has been guilty of infamous conduct m a professional respect ; and the Council having after due inquiry so adjudged, and ordered the name of the inedical practitioner to he removed from the register accordingly, this Court cannot interfere. Montagu Chambers moved, on behalf of a Mi-. La Mert for a rule caUing on the General Council of Medical Education and Registration of the United Kingdom to show cause why a mandamus should not issue commanding them to restore the name of the applicant to the Medical Register. Mr. La Mert's name had been properly inserted in the register under the 21
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3