Edward Ezekiel Riding

Preliminary Matters
Proceeding in Private
1. Mr Bellis on behalf of the Registrant made an application for all the hearing to be in private. He submitted that a public hearing could prejudice the ongoing third-party investigations.
2. Mr Jaddoo supported the application for the whole hearing to be in private.
3. The Panel had regard to the advice of the Legal Assessor and took account of the HCPC practice note. The Panel considered that although there was a general principle that these proceedings should be in public, in this case it was in the interests of justice for the case to be heard in private. The evidence suggests ongoing investigation by other organisations namely the police and the coroner. A public hearing could prejudice those ongoing investigations. It determined that it would not be practicable to hear the case partially in public as the matters which relate to the third-party investigations are pervasive.
4. Mr Bellis requested that Mr Tom Eustice (a HCPC staff member) be allowed to observe for training and development purposes. He informed the Panel that Mr Jaddoo had no objection to this.
5. Mr Jaddoo had no objection to the observer from HCPC and asked if Ms Dee Chauhan, an assistant professional service officer at UNISON could observe for training purposes.
6. Mr Bellis had no objection to Ms Chauhan being present.
7. The Panel agreed for both observers to remain present as they are each bound by the overarching data protection principles of their respective organisations.

ORDER: The Registrar is directed to annotate the HCPC Register to show that, on an interim basis, Edward Riding, must comply with the following conditions of practice:

(Conditions in Private)

This order will be reviewed by the Committee no later than 21 November 2023 or earlier if new evidence which is relevant to the Order becomes available after it was made.

History of Hearings for Edward Ezekiel Riding