Health Care Complaints Commission v Rahman (No 2) [2021] NSWCATOD 65

Procedural Posture

Professional Disciplinary Complaint Concerning Medical Practitioner Registration / Stage Two Hearing and Principal Judgment on Protective Orders Following Stage One Findings

Legal Issues

1. 1 ['Whether the respondent was a fit and proper person to remain registered as a medical practitioner.' 'What protective orders should be made following findings of professional misconduct.' "Whether the respondent's registration should be cancelled and whether a period should be imposed before review may be sought." "Whether the respondent should pay the applicant's costs."]

Ratio Decidendi

Cancellation of the respondent's registration and a 12-month restriction on review were necessary to protect the public because the established professional misconduct involved gross and repeated inappropriate prescribing, including Schedule 4 and Schedule 8 drugs, prescribing without authority or adequate clinical assessment, excessive quantities, poor record keeping, self-prescribing and failure to heed warnings over many years. Although the respondent had practised under restrictions without recent transgression, had expressed remorse and had undertaken education, his illness did not explain the misconduct, the delay did not diminish its seriousness, and the Tribunal remained concerned...

Court Disposition

The respondent's registration as a medical practitioner was cancelled, review was barred for 12 months, and the respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

• ['The registration of the respondent as a medical practitioner is cancelled with effect from seven days after the date of these orders;' 'Pursuant to s 149C(7) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW), an application for review of these orders may not to be made during the period of 12 months...