What this means
Start with the exact decision in front of you.
Two case examiners consider whether a case should conclude, result in another outcome or proceed to the Fitness to Practise Committee. Each option has a different practical and publication effect.
Immediate priorities
Organise the position before responding.
Review the complete case-examiner material
Respond to proposed outcomes as well as allegations
Assess whether any undertakings are workable
Detailed guidance
The procedure, evidence and possible route from here.
01
Case examiners decide what follows investigation
NMC case examiners work in pairs and review the investigation evidence after information has been gathered. They consider whether the material shows a case requiring Fitness to Practise Committee adjudication or whether another outcome is appropriate. They do not conduct a live final hearing. Their paper decision should be approached through the evidence, current risk and the outcomes available under the NMC framework rather than through assumptions borrowed from another regulator.
Prepare a short decision map separating facts, seriousness, current impairment and public protection. Where a witness account conflicts with a care record, identify the precise conflict and its significance. Where an event is accepted, address what has changed. Case examiners need a coherent record; attaching every employment document without explaining relevance can conceal the strongest point and increase the risk of sensitive material being circulated unnecessarily. Keeping that question separate makes the resulting submission clearer and more reliable.
- Address the NMC case-examiner task on the papers
- Separate historic evidence from the current-risk case
- Index supporting documents by issue and relevance
02
Outcomes have different effects
A case can close with no case to answer, or case examiners may use advice, a warning or agreed undertakings where the legal tests are met. Where they consider unrestricted practice is not appropriate and the matter requires adjudication, they can refer it to the Fitness to Practise Committee. These routes differ in publication, monitoring and effect on work. Read the proposed wording and official explanation before responding. That distinction prevents a general explanation from being mistaken for case-specific legal advice.
Undertakings require the professional's agreement and should be workable, measurable and sufficient for the risk. A warning does not operate like conditions of practice, although it remains a formal regulatory outcome. Referral transfers the case for an independent panel decision; it does not prove the allegations. When evaluating a proposal, consider its factual basis, scope, duration, monitoring and the consequence of non-compliance rather than choosing it solely to avoid a hearing.
- Compare no case, advice, warning, undertakings and referral
- Test proposed undertakings against the real workplace
- Do not describe referral as a final finding
03
Keep the decision record complete
When the decision arrives, check the allegation wording, facts relied on, reasons and operative outcome. Compare it with the bundle that was actually provided. Preserve proof of submissions and identify any apparent factual mistake or omitted material promptly. Review or challenge routes are defined by the NMC's legal framework; dissatisfaction alone does not create a general right to have a new pair of decision-makers start again. The result depends on the governing rules, the available evidence and the person's current circumstances.
If the case is referred, the NMC legal team reviews the regulatory concerns, drafts charges and prepares the hearing case. The later charge may not use identical language to the case-examiner concern. Maintain a version history and revisit admissions, disclosure and evidence against the formal charge. If the case closes or resolves, comply with any advice, warning or undertaking and retain evidence of later action in case a related concern arises.
- Audit the reasons against the submitted record
- Preserve each version of concerns and charges
- Implement and document any operative outcome
Key questions
Keep the analysis tied to this stage.
Whether there is a case to answer
Whether advice, warning or undertakings are proportionate
Whether referral to the committee is required
Advice is provided only by the regulated firm that accepts a matter.
Common questions
Clarifying the route without assuming the outcome.
Do NMC case examiners hear witnesses?
They make the end-of-investigation decision on the evidence assembled for them. A Fitness to Practise Committee hearing is the route for live evidence where adjudication is required.
Is an NMC warning the same as conditions of practice?
No. A warning is a formal outcome but does not restrict practice in the same way as an order of conditions. Check the wording and publication effect of the individual decision.
Connected guidance
Continue through the topic map.
Use the hub for the full sequence or choose the connected route that matches the notice.
Official sources
Check the material for this question.
Sources checked 19 September 2026. Rules change, so compare the current notice and linked official material and tell the operator if a citation or summary needs correction.