The case against a superintendent pharmacist of a company which had made an illegal sale of a prescription only medicine has been dismissed by the Statutory Committee.
At its meeting on October 19, 1999, the committee inquired into the case of Hillcrest (Pharmacies) Ltd, which operated a pharmacy at 104-106 Holland Park Avenue, London W11, and its superintendent pharmacist Mr Ashif Shokatali Dharamshi Premji, of Flat 2, 4 Brandreth Road, Balham, London SW17.
Information had been received that on September 9, 1998, the company had pleaded guilty to and had been convicted at Marylebone magistrates court of unlawfully selling Nubain injections, a prescription only medicine, by way of wholesale dealing, to a company called Imperaline Ltd. Hillcrest had been fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 costs.
The Council of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society had also alleged that Mr Premji, the superintendent pharmacist of Hillcrest (Pharmacies) Ltd at the relevant time, had delegated responsibility for the sale to a person who was not a pharmacist without satisfying himself that the sale was lawful, and that that amounted to misconduct which might render him unfit to be on the register of pharmaceutical chemists.
Mr D. Reissner, of Charles Russell (solicitors), represented Hillcrest (Pharmacies) Ltd and Mr Premji, who was present at the hearing.
Mr G. R. F. Hudson, of Walker Martineau (solicitors), appeared in order to place the facts of the case before the committee.
The committee was told that in October, 1997, a request had been made to the company for a supply to Imperialine Ltd of Nubain, an analgesic, which was also known to be abused by bodybuilders in training. The request had been received by the husband of the owner of the company, Mr S. Patel, who assisted in the running of the business, through an overseas pharmaceutical contact. Mr Patel had asked Mr Premji whether the supply could be made.
Mr Premji had not dealt with such a sale before and made inquiries. He checked whether Hillcrest's turnover was sufficient to allow it to export, which it could do if the export content of the business was less than 5 per cent. He asked Mr Patel to do a company search on Imperialine to check whether this type of exporting was within its stated business objects, and to obtain its wholesale dealer's licence. A copy of the licence was obtained by fax. Although it was a genuine licence, part of the heading had been covered so that it read "Wholesale Dealer's Licence", the remaining words, namely, "General Sale List Products" having been masked off. Mr Premji also asked Mr Patel to make inquiries of the Medicines Control Agency (MCA), telling him what to ask; Mr Premji was busy in the pharmacy when Mr Patel made the telephone call and heard parts of the conversation. The MCA confirmed that Imperialine had a wholesale dealer's licence and Mr Premji allowed the transaction, for 200 boxes of 10 2ml ampoules to go through.
Shortly afterwards, another order, for 1,000 boxes of Nubain, was received. Mr Premji then told Mr Patel he would need more information, as he had understood the original order was a "one off". He said he would need to see the airways bill for the first order and a signed order from the overseas customer; he said he would ask the National Pharmaceutical Association for guidelines on such transactions; and he asked to see the original of Imperialine's wholesale dealer's licence. He then placed the order but instructed Mr Patel that nothing should be released until his queries had been resolved.
The committee was told that the MCA had earlier admonished Imperialine for obtaining supplies of prescription only medicines from other pharmacies but had not revoked its licence. Representatives of the MCA visited the pharmacy to check on the purchases of Nubain soon after the order for 1,000 boxes arrived at the pharmacy; they warned Mr Premji and the company to stop dealing with Imperiline, and seized the Nubain. Shortly before the MCA representatives arrived at the pharmacy, Mr Premji was shown the original of Imperialine's wholesaler's licence. When he saw it, Mr Premji realised he had been duped.
He had been completely open about the matter and had stood to make no financial gain.
Giving the committee's decision, the chairman (Mr Gary Flather, QC) said that there were criticisms that could be made of Mr Premji. The committee was concerned that he had left someone else to make inquiries which he should have made himself. If he had spoken directly to the MCA about Nubain, that might have caused a bell to ring. He might also be criticised for being naive, particularly when making such a transaction for the first time. However, the chairman concluded, it had not been proved that there was anything else that he had done that was wrong. The committee felt that his actions did not constitute serious misconduct and dismissed the case.
The conviction against Hillcrest (Pharmacies) Ltd had been proved; it was decided to take no further action against the company.