5 January 2012
Court imposes fine for illegal tooth whitening
A Devon-based, ‘cosmetologist’ has been successfully prosecuted for offering tooth whitening treatment and ordered to pay a total of £1,872.
Tooth whitening is the practice of dentistry and only those registered with the General Dental Council (GDC) may lawfully offer it as a treatment.
On Thursday 22 December 2011 Mr Carl Espano, of 29 Western Road, Torquay, Devon, TQ1 4RJ pleaded guilty at West London Magistrates’ Court to practising dentistry when not registered with the GDC, contrary to section 38 (1) and (2) of the Dentists’ Act 1984.
He has been fined £1,000 and ordered to pay a £15 victim surcharge. He has also been ordered to pay full costs to the GDC of £857.
Mr Espano, in mitigation for his actions, raised the House of Lords judgement in the case of ‘Optident and Another v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Another (2001) UKHL 32. However, the magistrates’ appeared to give this argument little or no weight when determining his sentence.
The Magistrates told Mr Espano:
“This is a serious offence, particularly for potential victims as you didn’t have any indemnity in place for any damage you might have done to any teeth. In addition, should you have damaged the adult teeth, a patient only has one set. Accordingly we view this as a serious offence.”
Chief Executive and Registrar of the GDC Evlynne Gilvarry said:
“We are committed to taking action against people who offer tooth whitening unlawfully. They are a risk to the people they treat and it is our duty act to ensure public safety.”
Ends
Notes to editors:
1. The Dentists Act 1984 makes it a criminal offence for anyone other than a registered dental professional to carry out dentistry. The GDC is committed to protecting the public by bringing cases of illegal practice to court.
2. As the UK regulatory body of the dental profession, the GDC has a duty to protect the public. Registration with the GDC is a legal requirement for dentists and the following dental care professionals:
• clinical dental technicians
• dental hygienists
• dental technicians
• dental therapists
• dental nurses
• orthodontic therapists
3. Optident was a House of Lords case in 2001 which established that opalescence tooth whitening gel was a cosmetic product and its supply was therefore regulated by the Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations. The case is used erroneously by some tooth whitening companies to support the contention that tooth whitening is therefore a cosmetic procedure. This is clearly incorrect as the case was not concerned with the process of tooth whitening, only the product itself.