Health Care Complaints Commission v Thurlow [2024] NSWCATOD 119

Health Care Complaints Commission v Thurlow [2024] NSWCATOD 119

The Tribunal found Complaints 1, 2, and 4 established: the respondent was convicted of serious criminal offences, failed to notify the National Board as required, and did not maintain professional indemnity insurance when required. Complaint 3 was not established as the conduct was not captured by s.139B(1)(l). The established complaints constituted professional misconduct under s.139E sufficiently serious to warrant cancellation if registered, and a period of disqualification from re-registration.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Proceeding / Final Orders After Hearing
Outcome
Orders made. Registration would have been cancelled if respondent were registered; respondent disqualified from being registered for one year; National Board to record finding; timetable set for costs submissions.
Legal Topics
['professional Misconduct' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'chiropractic Registration' 'criminal Convictions' 'failure to Notify Regulator' 'professional Indemnity Insurance']
['health Law' 'professional Discipline'] ['professional Misconduct' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'chiropractic Registration' 'criminal Convictions' 'failure to Notify Regulator' 'professional Indemnity Insurance']

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

Disciplinary Proceeding / Final Orders After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent was guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct under the National Law' "Whether respondent's conduct warranted cancellation or disqualification from registration" 'Whether respondent contravened notification and insurance requirements under the National Law' 'Interpretation of s.139B(1)(l) National Law regarding improper or unethical conduct']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found Complaints 1, 2, and 4 established: the respondent was convicted of serious criminal offences, failed to notify the National Board as required, and did not maintain professional indemnity insurance when required. Complaint 3 was not established as the conduct was not captured by s.139B(1)(l). The established complaints constituted professional misconduct under s.139E sufficiently serious to warrant cancellation if registered, and a period of disqualification from re-registration.

Court Disposition

Orders made. Registration would have been cancelled if respondent were registered; respondent disqualified from being registered for one year; National Board to record finding; timetable set for costs submissions.

Orders

  • ['If the Respondent was registered, the Tribunal would have cancelled his registration (s.149C(4)(a) National Law).' 'Respondent disqualified from being registered for one year from the date of order (s.149C(4)(b) National Law).' 'National Board to record this finding in the National Register (s.149C(4)(c) National...