Layer 1

PSNC to take funding cut fight to High Court

PSNC: Government failed to carry out a lawful consultation on its funding proposals

The Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee (PSNC) is launching a legal challenge to the pharmacy funding cuts, the negotiator confirmed on the day the cuts come into force.

PSNC has sought permission from the High Court to apply for judicial review on the grounds that the Secretary of State “failed to carry out a lawful consultation” on the proposals for the sector.

If the judicial review is granted, the hearing will take place “as soon as practicable”, PSNC said yesterday afternoon (December 1).

The negotiator believes the Department of Health (DH) acted unlawfully because it:

  • Failed to disclose that it had carried out an analysis of the profitability of pharmacies based on their Companies House data, as part of its impact assessment.
  • Delayed providing this analysis to PSNC until after the impact assessment was published.
  • Conducted an analysis that was "invalid" because of its sample size and because it used accounting returns, rather than economic returns, as the basis for assessing pharmacies’ economic viability.
  • Failed to analyse how many pharmacies could close.

PSNC said the National Pharmacy Association is a “named party” in the negotiator's legal challenge.

PSNC chief executive Sue Sharpe said: “PSNC has spent the past twelve months trying to work constructively with the DH and NHS England to enable community pharmacy to help the NHS meet the increasing challenges it faces."

"We have sought to avoid taking legal action and very much regret that the process the NHS has followed has made this impossible.”

The Department of Health said in response: "We do not accept the grounds for judicial review and will seek to persuade the Court that the case is without merit.”

Last month, PSNC's Mark Burdon shared an insider's view on the funding negotiations. Listen below:

Do you think the PSNC's legal challenge will work?

S Pessina, Pharmacist Director

Why fighting talk now after years of cow-towing to government ?? 

Farm Assistant, Community pharmacist

Oh I bet the government are crapping themselves. Give me a break PSNC! Do you have an interest in some legal firm because otherwise you are just wasting everyones money.

Valentine Trodd, Community pharmacist

Suppose some degree of sabre-rattling (even if it's a plastic Toys-R-Us one) is required to justify their existence and salaries.

N O, Pharmaceutical Adviser

"""With the term being bandied about in the press, lawyer David Reissner attempts to explain what a judicial review actually involves

Judicial reviews have been in the news lately. Junior doctors failed in an application to the High Court for a judicial review to stop health secretary Jeremy Hunt imposing a new contract on them. (WE ALL KNOW THE OUTCOME !!!!)

The High Court rules include a protocol for Judicial Review cases. Before court proceedings are started, the complainant is expected to send a formal letter to the decision-maker, setting out the grounds of challenge. If the decision-maker does not back down, a judicial review claim has to be lodged in the High Court promptly – and in any event within three months.

Once papers are lodged, a judge will decide whether the claimant has an arguable case. If so, permission will be given for the case to go forward to a full hearing. As recent months have shown, a judicial review is used to decide some of the most momentous issues of our time."""


Valentine Trodd, Community pharmacist

Wasting your time and lining the lawyers pockets.

Soon-To-Be Ex-Pharmacist, Superintendent Pharmacist

Not a cat in hell's chance.

Job of the week

Pharmacist Manager
Midlands, Cheshire & Dorset
Salary dependent upon experience