What this means
Start with the exact decision in front of you.
A meeting is decided on the papers in private, while a hearing permits live participation and evidence. The appropriate route can affect how disputed facts and personal evidence are tested.
Immediate priorities
Organise the position before responding.
Identify whether a meeting or hearing is proposed
Consider whether facts or witness credibility are disputed
Check the process for requesting or preparing for a hearing
Detailed guidance
The procedure, evidence and possible route from here.
01
Meetings and hearings decide cases differently
The NMC Fitness to Practise Committee can determine a case at a meeting or a hearing. At a meeting, the panel decides on documents and written submissions; the professional and witnesses do not attend. At a hearing, parties can attend, witnesses may give live evidence and questions can be asked. Both routes involve an independent panel and legal advice, and both can reach the same range of substantive outcomes within the committee's powers.
The NMC says it asks the nurse, midwife or nursing associate for their preference and that the professional can request a hearing. If there is no response, a meeting will usually be used unless a panel considers a hearing necessary. The best route depends on whether material facts or credibility require live evidence, participation needs and how the case can be resolved fairly. Convenience alone should not displace a real evidential need.
- Identify whether material facts or credibility are disputed
- Respond expressly to the NMC's route question
- Do not assume a meeting offers a lesser range of outcomes
02
Prepare a meeting case to stand on the papers
Because nobody attends a meeting to fill gaps, written material must be complete and navigable. Use an agreed background where possible, an allegation schedule, a chronology and clearly labelled submissions on facts, impairment and sanction. Explain professional terminology and identify where a document supports a point. Do not assume the panel will infer remediation from a course list or understand the significance of a clinical audit without explanation. Any response should connect this point to the documents and decision actually under consideration.
A meeting may suit a case with no material factual dispute, including some agreed resolution proposals, but the panel remains independent. It can request further information or reach a different conclusion within its powers. If the written record reveals a dispute requiring oral evidence, that may affect whether a hearing is desirable. Address route concerns early enough for case management rather than after the panel has begun considering the papers.
- Write each submission so it can be understood without oral explanation
- Explain the significance of clinical and remediation material
- Raise any need for live evidence before the event
03
Prepare a hearing around live evidence
At a hearing, the NMC presents its case and the professional or representative can participate, call evidence and question witnesses in accordance with procedure. Prepare witnesses on the process and their existing statements without scripting their answers. Identify conflicts between memory and records, and decide which documents each witness can properly authenticate or explain. Applications about privacy, special measures, attendance or format should be raised through case management. That distinction prevents a general explanation from being mistaken for case-specific legal advice.
The panel decides facts, current impairment and any sanction in stages. Live participation creates an opportunity to answer the case, but it also means evidence can be tested. A hearing should not be chosen merely to deliver a personal statement that could be provided reliably in writing. Conversely, a meeting should not be accepted to avoid difficult cross-examination when a decisive factual dispute cannot fairly be resolved on documents alone.
- Build a witness plan linked to disputed issues
- Use case management for privacy and participation needs
- Choose the route by fairness and evidence, not perceived ease
Key questions
Keep the analysis tied to this stage.
Fair determination of the issues
Need for oral evidence or cross-examination
Privacy, participation and procedural efficiency
Advice is provided only by the regulated firm that accepts a matter.
Common questions
Clarifying the route without assuming the outcome.
Can an NMC meeting impose the same sanctions as a hearing?
The NMC says the panel has the same range of sanctions at meetings and hearings. The major difference is how evidence and participation are handled.
Can a registrant ask for an NMC hearing instead of a meeting?
Yes. Current NMC guidance says a nurse, midwife or nursing associate has the right to request a hearing.
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.