NSW HCCC v Moulds [2011] NSWSC 65

NSW HCCC v Moulds [2011] NSWSC 65

The Tribunal identified the relevant considerations for fitness to practise and good character, considered the convictions and the circumstances of the offences, and was entitled to give substantial weight to the psychiatric evidence that Mr Moulds' conduct occurred during an active phase of bipolar illness complicated by medication, alcohol and work pressures. Its findings that the conduct was isolated, out of character, unlikely to be repeated, and did not prove present unfitness or lack of good character were evaluative factual findings open on the evidence and did not reveal error of law. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Appeal From a Decision of the Nurses and Midwives Tribunal Under the Nurses and Midwives Act 1991 / Supreme Court Appeal; Appeal Dismissed With Costs
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['nurses and Midwives Tribunal' 'fitness to Practise' 'good Character' 'impairment' 'sexual Offence Convictions' 'public Interest' 'appeal on Error of Law']
['administrative Law' 'health Practitioner Regulation' 'professional Discipline'] ['nurses and Midwives Tribunal' 'fitness to Practise' 'good Character' 'impairment' 'sexual Offence Convictions' 'public Interest' 'appeal on Error of Law']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Appeal From a Decision of the Nurses and Midwives Tribunal Under the Nurses and Midwives Act 1991 / Supreme Court Appeal; Appeal Dismissed With Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in law in determining that the first complaint, that the convictions and circumstances rendered Mr Moulds unfit in the public interest to practise nursing and/or midwifery, was not proved.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in law in determining that the second complaint, that Mr Moulds was not of good character, was not proved.' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to consider or adequately consider protection of the public, maintenance of public confidence in the nursing profession, the circumstances of the offences, and the evidence about risk and insight.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal identified the relevant considerations for fitness to practise and good character, considered the convictions and the circumstances of the offences, and was entitled to give substantial weight to the psychiatric evidence that Mr Moulds' conduct occurred during an active phase of bipolar illness complicated by medication, alcohol and work pressures. Its findings that the conduct was isolated, out of character, unlikely to be repeated, and did not prove present unfitness or lack of good character were evaluative factual findings open on the evidence and did not reveal error of law. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed with costs.']