Medical Regulatory Panel Challenges Court Decision on Suspended Doctor
The Medical and Dental Practitioners Investigation Panel (MDPIP) has formally appealed a Federal Capital Territory High Court judgment that overturned the interim suspension of Lagos-based medical practitioner Dr. Ferdinand Ejike Orji. The appeal, filed at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, represents a significant legal confrontation between medical regulatory authorities and judicial oversight.
This legal battle originates from Suit No: FCT/HC/CV/5318/2024, where the Chairman of the Panel and the Panel itself serve as appellants, while Dr. Orji stands as the respondent. The case centers on whether medical regulatory bodies have the authority to impose interim suspensions on practitioners facing serious disciplinary proceedings.
The Original Case and Court Ruling
Dr. Orji had approached the FCT High Court to challenge his interim suspension by the MDPIP, which followed his criminal conviction for negligence by the Lagos State High Court. The conviction related to treatment provided to a 16-year-old patient that resulted in significant bodily harm.
On July 1, 2025, Justice Kayode Agunloye of the FCT High Court, Gwagwalada Judicial Division, delivered a judgment that found the Panel had acted without jurisdiction, in bad faith, and in violation of Dr. Orji's right to fair hearing when it suspended him via a letter dated August 28, 2023.
The court issued three key orders:
- Order of certiorari to quash the suspension decision
- Order of prohibition preventing further suspension enforcement
- Perpetual injunction restraining the panel from implementing the suspension pending determination of Dr. Orji's case before the Medical and Dental Practitioners' Disciplinary Tribunal
Grounds of Appeal
The appellants contend that the trial court exceeded its authority by reviewing administrative actions of a statutory body. They argue that judicial review should examine only the legality of decisions, not their merits, citing the Supreme Court ruling in Korea National Oil Corporation v. O.P.S. (Nig.) Ltd (2018) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1604) 394 to support their position.
The Panel asserts that Justice Agunloye erred in law when he determined that the interim suspension was ultra vires (beyond the powers) of the Panel under Section 15(3)(c) of the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act, 2004. They maintain they acted pursuant to enabling laws that empower them to impose interim suspension pending disciplinary inquiry for public protection.
Key arguments in the appeal include:
- The trial court failed to identify any statutory provision stripping the Panel of its powers
- No evidence of bad faith by the appellants was established
- The court's interpretation limiting suspension powers to six months applies only to substantive suspensions after full hearing, not interim protective measures
- The High Court misapplied procedural timelines, erroneously attributing potential Tribunal delays to the Panel
- Interim suspensions are procedural and protective, not punitive in nature
Criminal Conviction Background
Dr. Orji, proprietor of Excel Medical Centre in Dolphin Estate, Ikoyi, Lagos, was convicted for medical negligence in January 2023 by Justice Adedayo Akintoye of the Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square.
The court found Dr. Orji guilty on four of six counts related to causing grievous harm and endangering the life of a 16-year-old patient. The incident occurred in July 2018 when Dr. Orji applied a Plaster of Paris (PoP) cast too tightly on the minor's leg, causing compartment syndrome that required 15 major surgeries.
Justice Akintoye determined that Dr. Orji committed a breach of duty by willfully refusing to remove the fibreglass cast despite complaints of severe pain. The court also noted he used non-medical staff to apply the cast, failed to conduct an x-ray to identify the injury level, and did not obtain consent from the patient's mother who was present at the hospital.
The conviction resulted in a one-year imprisonment sentence on counts two, three, four, and six, with the sentences ordered to run concurrently.
Legal Implications and Next Steps
This appeal is expected to clarify crucial aspects of medical regulatory authority in Nigeria, particularly regarding:
- The scope of interim suspension powers for medical regulatory bodies
- Limits of judicial review over administrative decisions of statutory bodies
- Balance between public protection and practitioners' rights
- Interpretation of Section 15(3)(c) of the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act
The appellants are seeking an order allowing the appeal, setting aside the FCT High Court judgment of July 1, 2025, and any other order the Court of Appeal may deem appropriate. The outcome will significantly impact how medical regulatory bodies exercise their disciplinary powers while ensuring practitioner rights are protected during investigative processes.
The case continues at the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, where a three-judge panel will consider the complex legal questions surrounding medical regulation, administrative law, and professional discipline in Nigeria's healthcare sector.
