Layer 1

Anonymous multiple to fund legal challenge against cuts

David Reissner: Looking into lawfulness of the cuts

An unnamed multiple has agreed to fund the costs of a legal challenge against the pharmacy funding cuts, C+D has learned.

David Reissner, senior healthcare partner at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys, confirmed to C+D today (November 1) that a client has asked him to “obtain a [senior lawyer’s] opinion on the lawfulness of the cuts” to pharmacy funding in England.

“I’ll be doing that as quickly as possible,” he told C+D.

Mr Reissner said he could not name the business in question, but confirmed “it is a multiple”.

The law firm urged pharmacists to contribute to the cost of a legal challenge last week (October 26), saying that just £10 from every pharmacy would help raise the “low six-figure sum” needed to fund the cost of a senior lawyer taking the “urgent hearings” to court.

Noel Wardle, a partner at the firm, said it had received “quite a flurry of contacts from pharmacists saying they’ll contribute” after the call-out.

10 Comments
Question: 
Would you contribute to legally challenging the cuts?

Jonny Johal, Pharmacy Area manager/ Operations Manager

Why is the PSNC silent? There are lawyers working for them, even one barrister at law.

Jonny Johal, Pharmacy Area manager/ Operations Manager

Which company, do you think, would take money from employee's bonus pot to give to the lawyers, and which parent company resides in a country which is famous for litigation? :-) Join the dot, ladies and gentlemen.

A Hussain, Senior Management

I've read that the NPA are already seeking the opinion of a QC.  Is this not just duplication of work/money? Lawyers win as ever.

Stephen Eggleston, Community pharmacist

"Multiple" doesn't necessarily mean Boots or Lloyd's - there are many privately owned multiples who may be trying to help here.

Ravi Patel, Community pharmacist

Stephen is right, even a multiple of 50 branches would 'only' look at a cost of £2-3k per pharmacy to potentially save a lot more if they were to win. Whomever they are, good on them - hopefully they win and get the praise they deserve from the rest of us!

Jupo Patel, Production & Technical

Great news. I wonder if the same 'anonymous' multiple is interested in the dangerous dispensaries which they inevitably must own??

Alan WHITEMANN, Communications

No no. The GPhC said they're fine. So they must be.

Valentine Trodd, Community pharmacist

Or perhaps the same one that doesn't have any money to pay pharmacists a bonus this year?

R G, Pharmacy Buyer

What about LPC fund collected from all pharmacies?

 

Lucky Ex-Locum, Superintendent Pharmacist

I was thinking 'Wow an altruistic multiple' but then I realised they have more to lose than anyone. Still, if it benefits everyone good for them.

Job of the week

Pharmacy Manager
Fareham, Hampshire
Competitive plus benefits