High Court dismisses UMAPs challenge to Leng Review

Getty/BrasilNut1

By Sarah Lowden

A legal challenge of the Leng Review by United Medical Associate Professionals has been dismissed by a High Court judge.

UMAPs had sought permission for a judicial review to challenge the full recommendations the independent report by Professor Gillian Leng, which examined the safety, effectiveness, and role of physician associates (PAs) and anaesthesia associates (AAs).

The legal action was taken by the union against NHS England, the Department of Health and Social Care and Professor Leng.

One aspect of UMAPs argument was that the title change from physician associate to assistant was unlawful because ‘associate’ is the term used in current legislation.

The court disagreed and said there was nothing in law to “prohibit the use of alternative titles in the workplace merited by stakeholder feedback”.

The group also claimed the Leng review was flawed in its methodology and there had been an absence of a cost-benefit analysis.

Judge Mr Justice MacDonald did not find in favour, and said the review had been produced “as the result of a sophisticated and independent exercise of judgement” and it “recognises and addresses deficiencies in the evidence”.