Surgeon Cleared to Return to Practice After Harassment Suspension as GMC Loses Fourth Appeal
A prominent transplant surgeon, who was suspended for sexually and racially harassing multiple junior colleagues, is now free to resume his medical career after the courts rejected a regulatory bid to have him permanently struck off. James Gilbert, a high-profile figure in the field, faced a 12-month suspension in 2024 following findings by a medical practitioners' tribunal service that he engaged in misconduct at Oxford University Health Foundation Trust.
Regulator's Persistent Efforts to Remove Surgeon Fail in Court
The General Medical Council (GMC), the body responsible for regulating doctors in the UK, argued vigorously that the suspension imposed on Mr Gilbert was insufficient. The regulator maintained that he should have been erased from the medical register, a move that would have banned him from practicing medicine entirely. However, in a significant ruling on 16 January, the Court of Appeal dismissed the GMC's fourth attempt to overturn the suspension decision, marking a major setback for the regulatory authority.
Mr Gilbert's suspension period concluded in September 2025, and he is currently registered as working at The Royal Buckinghamshire Hospital. The legal journey saw High Court Judge Mr Justice Calver previously rule in April that a 12-month suspension was appropriate, deeming erasure from the register a "disproportionate" punishment. This stance was upheld by the Court of Appeal, with Lady Justice Andrews stating there was no basis for judicial interference and dismissing the appeal on all grounds.
Victims Express Profound Disappointment and Safety Concerns
In a powerful statement to The Independent, the four NHS workers who were harassed by Mr Gilbert voiced their deep concerns. They revealed that the misconduct occurred over a decade, with several incidents taking place during live surgical procedures, directly jeopardising patient safety. The victims highlighted a "profound absence of institutional safety" and described the court's decision as a "deeply troubling moment" for both the public and the medical profession, criticising the standards deemed acceptable for doctors in the UK.
Following the ruling, a GMC spokesperson reiterated the regulator's clear position, emphasising that there is no place for sexual misconduct in healthcare and that Dr Gilbert should have been struck off. The spokesperson noted that the GMC appealed twice in this case to protect patients and uphold professional confidence. The only remaining avenue for further appeal would involve taking the case to the Supreme Court, with the GMC currently reviewing the appeal court's decision.
Calls for Systemic Reform in Medical Regulation
Professor Vivien Lees, senior Vice-President of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, responded to the latest ruling by calling for "significant systemic reform, including reviewing current sanctions." She argued that the current system of medical regulation has frequently failed targets of misconduct, often compounding trauma, allowing perpetrators to remain in authority, and ultimately undermining patient care. This case has sparked broader discussions about the effectiveness of disciplinary measures and the need for stronger protections within the healthcare sector.
Mr Gilbert has been approached for comment regarding the court's decision and his return to practice. The outcome continues to raise important questions about accountability, patient safety, and the balance between rehabilitation and punishment in cases of professional misconduct.
