Cardio-thoracic surgeon dismissed for falsifying patient records: dismissal fair
A cardio-thoracic surgeon with 20 years' service was fairly dismissed after admitting he completed 98 site verification forms before patients were admitted, inappropriately cancelled surgery, and failed to document care. The tribunal upheld the NHS Trust's decision.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #falsification-of-records
- #patient-safety
- #site-verification-forms
- #inappropriate-cancellation
- #inadequate-documentation
- #acas-code
Key facts
- The claimant admitted completing 98 site verification forms before patients were admitted, stating he had marked them when he had not.
- The claimant cancelled surgery for Patient D on a Friday, then reinstated the patient on Monday with no intention of operating, to avoid management pressure.
- The claimant failed to document care on the electronic patient record, relying on handwritten notes on consent forms that were not scanned until discharge.
- The dismissing officer, Dr Morris, found the claimant's apologies insincere because he continued to blame others and justify his actions.
- The appeal panel upheld the dismissal, concluding the claimant lacked insight into the severity of his conduct and posed a risk to patient safety.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Mr Poullis began working for the respondent as a cardio-thoracic surgeon.
-
Claimant changed SVP practice
After marrying, the claimant stopped attending hospital on Sundays and began completing site verification forms on Fridays before seeing patients.
-
Patient A SVP and cancellation
The claimant completed an SVP form for Patient A on a Friday before admission, then cancelled surgery on Monday citing missing notes.
-
Thoracic surgeons meeting
Thoracic surgeons met with management to raise concerns about the claimant's conduct, leading to an investigation.
-
Investigation terms of reference issued
Case manager Professor Wright issued initial terms of reference for the investigation into the claimant's conduct.
-
Investigatory interview
The claimant was interviewed by investigating officer Dr Ratnasingham, where he admitted completing SVP forms before marking patients.
-
Disciplinary hearing
The disciplinary panel heard the case; the claimant admitted allegations 1 and 3 and offered to accept a final written warning.
-
Dismissal decision
Dr Morris decided to dismiss the claimant for gross misconduct, citing risk of repetition and lack of insight.
-
Appeal hearing
The appeal panel, chaired by Mr Jones, heard the claimant's appeal and upheld the dismissal.
-
Appeal outcome
Mr Jones wrote to the claimant confirming the appeal was rejected, finding the dismissal fair and proportionate.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the NHS Trust acted reasonably in dismissing the surgeon for gross misconduct involving falsification of patient records, inappropriate cancellation of surgery, and inadequate documentation, and whether the investigation and procedure were fair.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the surgeon's claim of unfair dismissal. It found that the Trust had a genuine belief, formed on reasonable grounds after a reasonable investigation, that the surgeon had falsified site verification forms, inappropriately cancelled a patient's surgery, and failed to document care properly. The decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses, given the surgeon's lack of insight and risk to patient safety. The appeal process was also fair. The claim for wrongful dismissal also failed because the conduct amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract.
No compensation was awarded as the dismissal was fair.
Lessons & takeaways
- Falsifying patient records, even if you believe it is harmless, is likely to be treated as gross misconduct by an NHS employer.
- A long service record does not protect you if your conduct poses a risk to patient safety and you show a lack of insight.
- Admitting misconduct but blaming others or justifying your actions can undermine any apology and lead to dismissal.
- Employers should ensure investigations are thorough and that dismissing officers have a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds.
A surgeon's conduct that went too far
This case shows that even a highly skilled surgeon with two decades of service can be fairly dismissed if their conduct puts patient safety at risk and they fail to accept the seriousness of their actions. The surgeon admitted completing 98 site verification forms before patients were admitted, stating he had marked them when he had not. He also cancelled a patient's surgery on a Friday, then reinstated them on Monday with no intention of operating, to avoid management pressure. Additionally, he failed to document care on the electronic patient record, relying on handwritten notes on consent forms that were not scanned until discharge.
What the employer did right
The Trust carried out a thorough investigation, including interviewing the surgeon and considering his explanations. The dismissing officer, Dr Morris, found the surgeon's apologies insincere because he continued to blame others and justify his actions. The appeal panel upheld the dismissal, concluding the surgeon lacked insight into the severity of his conduct and posed a risk to patient safety. The tribunal noted that the Trust followed a fair procedure and considered the ACAS Code of Practice.
What this means for similar claims
This case reinforces that in healthcare settings, patient safety is paramount. Employers are expected to take a firm stance when conduct undermines trust in clinical processes. For employees, it highlights that admitting fault is not enough if you simultaneously deflect blame or minimise the risk. A fair investigation and a reasonable belief in misconduct, followed by a proportionate decision, will usually protect an employer from an unfair dismissal claim.
Similar cases
Falsified clocking-in record: dismissal for gross misconduct upheld
A production operator who asked a colleague to clock her in early was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal rejected her unfair dismissal claim, finding the employer's investigation and decision were reasonable.
Emergency medical technician dismissed for using racist language: 15 years' service didn't save her job
A tribunal has upheld the dismissal of an EMT with 15 years' service who used the n-word about a black colleague on two occasions, finding the employer's investigation and decision were within the range of reasonable responses.
Regional manager dismissed for failing to follow safeguarding policy: dismissal fair
A regional manager with 10 years' service was fairly dismissed after admitting she had not been following the employer's safeguarding policy for external reporting in secure settings.
12-year employee resigns over grievance handling: constructive dismissal and remedy
A housing association was found to have constructively dismissed a long-serving employee after mishandling his grievance. The tribunal awarded over £11,000 in compensation, including a basic award of £6,096 and a compensatory award of £1,073.