Health Care Complaints Commission v Saab (No 2) [2020] NSWCATOD 64
The Tribunal held that cancellation of Mr Saab's registration was not reasonably necessary to protect the public. Although he should have done more after the 2015 PRU report and his practical ability to rectify issues remained somewhat untested due to suspension, he acknowledged inadequate supervision, had sought assistance, had benefited from Mr Regoli's involvement, and tangible compliance improvements had occurred. Public protection was adequately achieved by reprimand and onerous conditions requiring performance assessment, mentoring and audits. A stay was refused because the conditions would have no operative effect until Mr Saab regained registration and his existing Council...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 June 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Professional Disciplinary Proceedings Against a Registered Pharmacist Concerning Protective Orders and Costs / Stage 2 Hearing Following Stage 1 Findings of Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct and Professional Misconduct
- Outcome
- Mr Saab was reprimanded, conditions were imposed on his registration, the Pharmacy Council of New South Wales was made the appropriate review body, no stay was ordered, and costs orders were made in favour of the Health Care Complaints Commission.
- Legal Topics
- ['protective Orders' 'reprimand' 'conditions on Registration' 'schedule 8 Medications' 'opioid Treatment Program' 'pharmacy Proprietor Supervision' 'costs Following Disciplinary Proceedings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Professional Disciplinary Proceedings Against a Registered Pharmacist Concerning Protective Orders and Costs / Stage 2 Hearing Following Stage 1 Findings of Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct and Professional Misconduct
Legal Issues
- 1 ['What protective orders should be made in the public interest following findings of unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct against Mr Saab.' "Whether Mr Saab's registration should be cancelled or whether reprimand and conditions would adequately protect the public." "Whether the Tribunal's orders should be stayed for 21 days to allow the Pharmacy Council of New South Wales to convene s 150C proceedings." 'What costs orders should be made for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 hearings.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal held that cancellation of Mr Saab's registration was not reasonably necessary to protect the public. Although he should have done more after the 2015 PRU report and his practical ability to rectify issues remained somewhat untested due to suspension, he acknowledged inadequate supervision, had sought assistance, had benefited from Mr Regoli's involvement, and tangible compliance improvements had occurred. Public protection was adequately achieved by reprimand and onerous conditions requiring performance assessment, mentoring and audits. A stay was refused because the conditions would have no operative effect until Mr Saab regained registration and his existing Council...
Court Disposition
Mr Saab was reprimanded, conditions were imposed on his registration, the Pharmacy Council of New South Wales was made the appropriate review body, no stay was ordered, and costs orders were made in favour of the Health Care Complaints Commission.
Orders
- ['Mr Saab is reprimanded under s 149A(1)(a) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW).' 'The conditions set out in Schedule A headed "Health Care Complaints Commission v Hussein Saab – Conditions" are to be imposed on Mr Saab\'s registration.' 'The Conditions may be altered, varied or removed at the...
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