Health Care Complaints Commission v Dr Victor King [2011] NSWMT 5

Health Care Complaints Commission v Dr Victor King [2011] NSWMT 5

The Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that numerous particulars were established, including inappropriate sexual questioning, intimate stroking, clinically unjustified digital penetration of patients B and D, inadequate treatment of patient C's wrist injury, poor communication, and inadequate records. Taken together, the conduct was serious and multifaceted professional misconduct. Because the practitioner denied the most serious misconduct, showed neither insight nor remorse, and the Tribunal could not be satisfied that he posed no risk to the public, deregistration was the only available protective course.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Complaint Alleging Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct And/or Professional Misconduct by a Registered Medical Practitioner / Principal Judgment
Outcome
The practitioner was deregistered on the ground that he was guilty of professional misconduct, with review barred for 18 months and costs orders made.
Legal Topics
['professional Misconduct' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'abuse of Trust' 'vulnerable Patient' 'poor Communication' 'inadequate Record Keeping' 'sexually Inappropriate Behaviour' 'digital Penetration' 'deregistration']
['health Law' 'medical Disciplinary Law' 'professional Regulation'] ['professional Misconduct' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'abuse of Trust' 'vulnerable Patient' 'poor Communication' 'inadequate Record Keeping' 'sexually Inappropriate Behaviour' 'digital Penetration' 'deregistration']

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

Disciplinary Complaint Alleging Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct And/or Professional Misconduct by a Registered Medical Practitioner / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the practitioner's conduct towards patients B, C and D involved inappropriate intimate conduct, including sexually inappropriate behaviour and clinically unjustified digital penetration." "Whether the practitioner inappropriately managed and treated patient C's wrist condition." 'Whether the practitioner kept adequate medical records for patients B and C.' 'Whether the established conduct amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct and/or professional misconduct.' 'Whether deregistration was necessary to protect the health and safety of the public.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that numerous particulars were established, including inappropriate sexual questioning, intimate stroking, clinically unjustified digital penetration of patients B and D, inadequate treatment of patient C's wrist injury, poor communication, and inadequate records. Taken together, the conduct was serious and multifaceted professional misconduct. Because the practitioner denied the most serious misconduct, showed neither insight nor remorse, and the Tribunal could not be satisfied that he posed no risk to the public, deregistration was the only available protective course.

Court Disposition

The practitioner was deregistered on the ground that he was guilty of professional misconduct, with review barred for 18 months and costs orders made.

Orders

  • ['The Tribunal directs that the practitioner be deregistered on the ground that he is guilty of professional misconduct.' 'The Tribunal orders that an application for review may not be made for a period of 18 months.' "The HCCC is to pay the practitioner's costs of 16 March 2011. Otherwise, the practitioner is to...