Selim v Lele [2005] FCA 24

Selim v Lele [2005] FCA 24

The Director adequately informed Dr Selim of the possibility to negotiate an agreement under s 92, and the omission of reference to s 92 in the adjudicative referral did not constitute a jurisdictional error or denial of procedural fairness; the application for judicial review must therefore be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['professional Services Review Scheme' 'inappropriate Practice' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']
['administrative Law' 'health Law'] ['professional Services Review Scheme' 'inappropriate Practice' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']

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

Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Director's construction of s 92 of the Health Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) constituted a jurisdictional error or denial of procedural fairness" 'Whether the application for review of the Director’s and Committee’s decisions should succeed on the basis of alleged procedural defects']

Ratio Decidendi

The Director adequately informed Dr Selim of the possibility to negotiate an agreement under s 92, and the omission of reference to s 92 in the adjudicative referral did not constitute a jurisdictional error or denial of procedural fairness; the application for judicial review must therefore be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' "The applicant pay the respondents' costs."]