A gynaecologist who admitted removing two women’s ovaries without consent is set to face a fresh hearing over whether he is fit to practise after a High Court challenge.
Dr Ali Shokouh-Amiri was found guilty of misconduct in February 2025 by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal and given a warning, with the panel ruling that his fitness to practise was not impaired.
It was alleged that while working at the Princess Elizabeth Hospital in Guernsey, Dr Shokouh-Amiri acted in an inappropriate or sexually motivated way in relation to four patients, as well as allegations of dishonesty and failing to have a chaperone present.
The gynaecologist admitted removing two women’s ovaries without their consent, including in one case where there was no medical need indicated, but denied other allegations.
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal found claims Dr Shokouh-Amiri had hugged and kissed a patient proved, but found it did not amount to misconduct, and found other allegations related to inappropriate and sexually motivated conduct not proved.
The tribunal found other proven allegations, including the ovary removal and suggesting to a patient that they should join him in the gym, amounted to misconduct.
However, it found his fitness to practise was not impaired and that there was a low risk of Dr Shokouh-Amiri putting patients at risk of unwarranted harm.
The General Medical Council (GMC) brought an appeal against the tribunal’s decision at the High Court in late 2025.
And in a judgment on Friday, Mr Justice Morris ruled in favour of the GMC, finding that the tribunal had made “wrong or unjust” decisions related to five sets of allegations.
The judge provisionally said the case should return to the Medical Practitioners Tribunal to re-decide those allegations, and whether Dr Shokouh-Amiri’s fitness to practise was impaired.
Mr Justice Morris said in the 70-page ruling that the tribunal’s reasons were “at times very brief and at other times makes little sense”.
The judge later said: “The tribunal, at various points, made clear errors of fact, failed to consider important evidence, did not explain why it did not believe Patient F’s evidence, and made statements which contradicted the evidence, and at times statements which did not make sense.”
Mr Justice Morris dismissed part of the GMC’s challenge about how the tribunal considered propensity in Dr Shokouh-Amiri’s case.
He said: “Even if the allegations in relation to Patient F are proved, I do not accept that they alone could have tipped the balance in relation to Patient A and Patient D.
“Any propensity arising from findings in relation to Patient F should not be permitted to bolster those weak, and unchallenged, cases.”
A GMC spokesperson said: “We welcome the High Court’s decision to allow our appeal.
“The court agreed that the tribunal made errors when considering the very serious allegations against Dr Ali Shokouh-Amiri, with the judgment noting that at various points, clear errors of fact were made and the tribunal failed to consider important evidence.
“We will continue to challenge tribunal decisions where we believe the outcome is insufficient to protect the public.”
