A former Wirral pharmacist, Mr Stuart Blake, was sentenced to 100 hours community service on November 4, after being found guilty of neglecting his duties. The neglect took place prior to his being struck off for allowing medicines to be sold and dispensed without pharmaceutical supervision.
Mr Blake, who admitted two neglect charges and six of illegally supplying medicines to residential homes and individuals, was also ordered to pay nominal fines of £60 for the supply offences. Liverpool Crown Court heard that he had enormous debts following the collapse of his pharmacy business.
Sentencing, the judge, Recorder Nigel Gilmour, QC, said that it was not appropriate to order Mr Blake to pay the £22,000 costs of the case or to impose heavy fines.
The legal action, which involved accusations of continuing to trade while not registered with the Royal Pharmaceutical Society was the first of its kind at a British Crown Court.
Recorder Gilmour said that he regarded the two neglect charges as far more serious than the other offences. They arose after Society inspectors visited Mr Blake's pharmacy at Magazine Lane, Wallasey, and found improperly labelled medicines and were able to make test purchases in his absence.
The judge told Mr Blake: "I am satisfied that you knew what the regulations required of you and that by your neglect you failed to ensure that those regulations were being complied with."
The six illegal supply charges, brought by the Crown Prosecution Service, involved the supply of Class A and Class C Controlled Drugs to residential homes in Runcorn and Kirkby and to two individuals.
These offences came to light on May 28, 1998, when Society inspectors visited Mr Blake's Homechem pharmacy two days after it and Mr Blake had been removed from the premises register and pharmaceutical register, respectively, for failure to pay annual registration fees. In addition to finding the premises open for business, they also found that unused medicines returned from nursing homes were being used to dispense new prescriptions.
The following day, Mr Blake had gone to London to pay his personal and premises registration fees. Premises registration had not come into effect until June 11, by which time medicines had been supplied to a residential home, the court was told.
The judge said that he took the view that this offence had involved "administrative carelessness".
Mrs Helen Darracott (the Society's head of ethics) told The Journal on November 10 that the charge of neglect arose because it was possible to prosecute individuals who failed to prevent the commission of an offence by consent, connivance or neglect of duties.