Miles Bryers

Preliminary Matters

Service
1. The Registrant attended the hearing remotely and for part of the hearing was supported by special counsel in order to cross-examine some witnesses. The Panel was satisfied that the formalities of service had been effected properly.

Special measures

2. Mr Ive, on behalf of the HCPC reminded the Panel that special counsel, Ms Yeghikian, had been appointed by the HCPC to conduct the cross-examination of witnesses A, B, and C. Mr Ive further invited the Panel to give effect to the special measures application made in respect of witness Colleague D:
(i) For the Registrant to switch off his camera during her evidence, and
(ii) also to be cross-examined by special counsel.

3. Mr Ive explained that witness Colleague D felt intimidated by the prospect of being cross-examined directly by the Registrant. Mr Ive acknowledged that the Registrant had not attempted to approach or to intimidate the witness in any way. She however felt unable to provide her best evidence when faced with the prospect of being directly cross-examined by the Registrant.

4. The Registrant did not object to the application being granted.

5. The Panel accepted the Legal Assessor’s advice and had regard to the Practice Note Special Measures last updated 22 March 2017.

6. The Panel agreed that,
• although the witness, Colleague D did not neatly fit into any of the categories of vulnerable witnesses, nor
• had she been intimidated by anything done by the Registrant
it was foreseeable that her reaction to being a witness without special measures would inhibit her ability to give best evidence. The witnesses’ feelings were genuine though not related to anything done by the Registrant. The Panel accepted what Mr Ive had said; that the key test was whether the witnesses’ feelings of intimidation were genuinely held regardless of the intentions of any other person.

7. The Panel decided that it was in the public interest that all of the witnesses were placed in a position to support their giving evidence, which might otherwise be lost or be diminished without modifications in procedure. In circumstances where the Registrant did not object, the Panel found no fair-hearing reason not to apply the special measures.

Privacy application

8. Mr Ive, on behalf of the HCPC made an application for part of the hearing to be held in private. Mr Ive said that it could be anticipated that the Registrant would give evidence related to his mental health and private life during the hearing. Mr Ive explained that it would be practical for the hearing to move from public to private session in discreet chapters of evidence.

9. The Registrant supported the application. He explained that he had suffered from mental ill health for some time and that it was relevant to the period of time under review. Further, his private family life was relevant in the period of time leading up to August 2021 in regard to the stressors driving his conduct. In answer to Panel questions, he was unable to say that the mental health and private matters would be confined to specific and immediately identifiable passages of evidence as it developed.

10. The Panel accepted the Legal Assessor’s advice and had regard to Rule 10 of the HCPC (Conduct and Competence Committee) (Procedure) Rules 2002 (the Rules). It also took into account the guidance provided by the Practice Note Conducting Hearings in Private last updated on 22 March 2017.

11. Rule 10 affords the Panel a discretion to depart, where appropriate and justified, from the normal open hearing in public. In this case, the Panel had a real concern for the potentially disruptive effect of being required, repeatedly, to move in and out of public session which could impact adversely on both the HCPC witnesses for whom special measures applied and also the Registrant. In the whole circumstances, the Panel was not persuaded that the periods when it would be necessary to invoke the discretion were easily predictable and could be managed without having the potential to impact on the fairness of the proceedings overall. Accordingly, although not asked to do so, the Panel decided to conduct the hearing entirely in private as permitted by the Rule.

ORDER: The Registrar is directed to suspend the registration of Mr Miles Bryers for a period of 12 months from the date this Order comes into effect.

Right of Appeal
You may appeal to the High Court in England and Wales against the Panel’s decision and the order it has made against you.
Under Article 29(10) of the Health Professions Order 2001, any appeal must be made within 28 days of the date when this notice is served on you. The Panel’s order will not take effect until the appeal period has expired or, if you appeal, until that appeal is disposed of or withdrawn.

History of Hearings for Miles Bryers