In Re Dr Geoffrey Ian Barratt and the Medical Practice Act 1992 [2004] NSWMT 7

In Re Dr Geoffrey Ian Barratt and the Medical Practice Act 1992 [2004] NSWMT 7

The Commission substantially proved repeated failures by Dr Barratt to keep required prescription and treatment records, failures to record required particulars on prescriptions, and multiple instances of prescribing Schedule 8 drugs without the authority required by statute and by conditions on his right to practise. Those breaches were serious and amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct. However, having regard to the nature of the particulars proved, Dr Barratt's ready acceptance of his shortcomings, and peer opinions describing the criticism as mild or moderate, the conduct did not warrant a finding of professional misconduct.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Complaint Under S 51 Medical Practice Act, 1992 Alleging Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct And/or Professional Misconduct / Reasons for Determination After Hearing
Outcome
Dr Barratt was found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct, reprimanded, and made subject to specified conditions if he applied for a practising certificate; no order as to costs was made.
Legal Topics
['unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'prescribing Drugs of Addiction' 'schedule 8 and Schedule 4 D Drugs' 'medical Record Keeping' 'conditions on Medical Registration' 'standard of Proof in Disciplinary Proceedings']
['health Practitioner Regulation' 'medical Disciplinary Law' 'poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation'] ['unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'prescribing Drugs of Addiction' 'schedule 8 and Schedule 4 D Drugs' 'medical Record Keeping' 'conditions on Medical Registration' 'standard of Proof in Disciplinary Proceedings']

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

Complaint Under S 51 Medical Practice Act, 1992 Alleging Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct And/or Professional Misconduct / Reasons for Determination After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Dr Barratt failed to make and keep required records of prescriptions and treatment for multiple patients.' 'Whether Dr Barratt prescribed drugs of addiction without required authority and in breach of conditions on his right to practise.' 'Whether the proved conduct amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct and/or professional misconduct.' 'What protective orders or conditions should apply if Dr Barratt sought to return to practice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission substantially proved repeated failures by Dr Barratt to keep required prescription and treatment records, failures to record required particulars on prescriptions, and multiple instances of prescribing Schedule 8 drugs without the authority required by statute and by conditions on his right to practise. Those breaches were serious and amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct. However, having regard to the nature of the particulars proved, Dr Barratt's ready acceptance of his shortcomings, and peer opinions describing the criticism as mild or moderate, the conduct did not warrant a finding of professional misconduct.

Court Disposition

Dr Barratt was found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct, reprimanded, and made subject to specified conditions if he applied for a practising certificate; no order as to costs was made.

Orders

  • ['The Tribunal finds Dr Barratt guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct.' 'Dr Barratt is reprimanded.' 'Should any application be made by Dr Barratt for a practising certificate, it shall be a condition of his registration that he enter supervised employment in a public hospital for a period of 2 years to be...