Health Care Complaints Commission v Robinson [2017] NSWCATOD 147
The Tribunal found significant instances of unsatisfactory professional conduct proved concerning Patient A, Patient C, Patient D, clinical record failures, self-prescribing, and prescribing to a close family member. Although the Patient B facts were substantially established, that conduct was not found to be significantly below the relevant standard because the planned operation was cancelled. The misconduct concerning Patients A, C and D was particularly serious, and when aggregated with the other misconduct justified suspension or cancellation of registration, so the respondent was guilty of professional misconduct. The Tribunal was not satisfied at stage 1 that impairment had been...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 October 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Disciplinary Proceedings Concerning a Medical Practitioner / Stage 1 Hearing to Establish Complaints and Particulars; Stage 2 Hearing Stood Over for Protective Orders and Impairment Consideration
- Outcome
- The respondent was found guilty of professional misconduct; impairment consideration and further proceedings were stood over to a stage 2 hearing.
- Legal Topics
- ['unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'impairment' 'surgical Care' 'self Prescribing' 'prescribing to Close Family Member' 'clinical Records']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Proceedings Concerning a Medical Practitioner / Stage 1 Hearing to Establish Complaints and Particulars; Stage 2 Hearing Stood Over for Protective Orders and Impairment Consideration
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the respondent's conduct in relation to Patients A, B, C and D amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct under section 139B of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW)." 'Whether failures to document clinical matters contravened the Health Practitioner Regulation (NSW) Regulation 2010 and amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct.' 'Whether self-prescribing and prescribing to a close family member amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct.' 'Whether the established instances of unsatisfactory professional conduct, individually or cumulatively, amounted to professional misconduct under section 139E of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW).' 'Whether the respondent was impaired within the meaning of section 5 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW).']
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found significant instances of unsatisfactory professional conduct proved concerning Patient A, Patient C, Patient D, clinical record failures, self-prescribing, and prescribing to a close family member. Although the Patient B facts were substantially established, that conduct was not found to be significantly below the relevant standard because the planned operation was cancelled. The misconduct concerning Patients A, C and D was particularly serious, and when aggregated with the other misconduct justified suspension or cancellation of registration, so the respondent was guilty of professional misconduct. The Tribunal was not satisfied at stage 1 that impairment had been...
Court Disposition
The respondent was found guilty of professional misconduct; impairment consideration and further proceedings were stood over to a stage 2 hearing.
Orders
- ['The respondent is found guilty of professional misconduct.' 'Consideration of whether the respondent is impaired is stood over for further hearing to the stage 2 hearing.' 'The further proceedings are stood over for stage 2 hearing on 7 and 8 February 2018']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment