(Copy and adapt from the page — use the buttons above the template. Working template — copy and adapt to your case and regulator. Not legal advice; use at your own risk.)

PART 1 — LETTER TO THE REGULATOR

[Your name] · [Registration number]
[Address]
[Date]

To: [Case Presentation Officer], [Regulator]
Copy: [Hearings team]

Dear Sir or Madam,

Re: [Case reference] — objection to hearsay evidence

I write to object to the regulator’s reliance on the following items of hearsay evidence and to ask the panel to determine admissibility as a preliminary issue at the start of the substantive hearing.

1. The hearsay items objected to

I object to the admission of the following items insofar as they are relied on for the truth of their content:

• [Item 1 — document / statement, paragraph or page reference, brief description of the assertion relied on]
• [Item 2 — as above]
• [Item 3 — as above]

2. Legal framework

Hearsay is admissible in fitness-to-practise proceedings, but its admission is subject to the panel’s overriding duty to ensure a fair hearing. It is well established that the fairness principles on confrontation of witnesses apply to regulatory proceedings. The panel must apply a three-stage test:

• Is the hearsay the sole or decisive evidence of the allegation?
• Is there a good reason for the witness’s non-attendance?
• Are there sufficient counterbalancing measures to ensure a fair hearing?

Where the answer to (1) is yes and the answer to (2) or (3) is no, the evidence should not be admitted.

3. Application to each item

For each item objected to, I invite the panel to find:

• Sole or decisive: [explain why the hearsay is the only or main evidence of the allegation in question — e.g. no other witness saw the events, no contemporaneous record]
• Reason for non-attendance: [explain why the reason given is not “good” — e.g. no statement of unwillingness, no medical evidence of inability, no trace history]
• Counterbalancing measures: [identify what is missing — no corroboration, no opportunity to test the account, no contemporaneous documentation]

4. Relief sought

• A direction that the hearsay items identified above be excluded from the evidence on which the panel relies.
• In the alternative, a direction that the items be admitted but attributed minimal weight, with reasons recorded in the determination.
• A direction that the regulator file a witness statement from its case presentation officer setting out the steps taken to secure the attendance of each absent witness.

I would be grateful if this objection could be placed before the panel as a preliminary issue at the start of the substantive hearing on [date]. I reserve the right to amplify these points orally and to make further written submissions if and when the regulator clarifies the reasons for non-attendance of any witness.

Yours faithfully,

[Your full name]
[Registration number]

PART 2 — SKELETON ARGUMENT

Adapt for use at the hearing as a preliminary issue, or attach as an exhibit to written submissions in opening. Keep it tight — three to five pages.

A. Introduction

• This is a skeleton in support of the registrant’s objection to the regulator’s reliance on identified hearsay evidence.
• The objection is taken at the earliest opportunity as a preliminary issue, in accordance with the regulator’s rules of procedure and the panel’s case management powers.

B. The legal framework

• Hearsay is admissible in regulatory proceedings (NMC Rule 31; GMC FTPR Rule 34; equivalent in HCPC, GPhC, GDC and SWE rules).
• Admission is subject to the panel’s overriding duty under common law and Article 6 ECHR to ensure a fair hearing.
• It is an established principle that the human-rights fairness standards on the confrontation of witnesses apply to regulatory fitness-to-practise proceedings.
• The settled structured approach is: (i) is the evidence sole or decisive? (ii) is there a good reason for non-attendance? (iii) are there sufficient counterbalancing measures?
• It is a long-recognised principle of fairness that the registrant must have an effective opportunity to challenge serious allegations, and that the panel must conduct a careful balancing exercise before admitting untested hearsay.

C. Application

• Item 1: [identify item]. The hearsay is sole/decisive because [reasons]. The reason given for non-attendance is [reason]. That reason is not a “good reason” because [reasons]. The counterbalancing measures relied on by the regulator (if any) are [identify]. They are insufficient because [reasons].
• Item 2: as above.
• Item 3: as above.

D. Relief

The panel is invited to:

• (a) Exclude the identified items from the evidence on which it relies; or
• (b) In the alternative, admit them only at minimal weight, with reasons recorded; and
• (c) Direct that the regulator file a statement from its case presentation officer setting out what enquiries were made of each absent witness, when, by whom and with what response.

E. Reservation

• The registrant reserves the right to revisit these objections in closing submissions in the light of the evidence that emerges at the hearing, including the cogency (or lack of it) of any other evidence on which the regulator relies.

[END OF TEMPLATE]