Health Care Complaints Commission v Gorrell (No 2) [2022] NSWCATOD 62

Health Care Complaints Commission v Gorrell (No 2) [2022] NSWCATOD 62

The practitioner's serious and sustained misconduct involved a fundamental breach of trust, abuse of the power imbalance between psychologist and client, breaches of the APS Code of Ethics, and professional misconduct. He had been on notice about boundary and risk issues, demonstrated no real insight or genuine...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Proceedings Against a Psychologist Under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (nsw) / Stage 2 Protective Orders Following Stage 1 Findings of Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct and Professional Misconduct
Outcome
Protective orders made; respondent disqualified from registration as a psychologist for five years, prohibited from providing health services until reinstatement or other order, and ordered to pay the HCCC's costs.
Legal Topics
['psychologist' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'professional Boundaries' 'cancellation of Registration' 'disqualification From Registration' 'prohibition Order' 'costs']
['health Practitioner Regulation' 'professional Discipline' 'administrative Law'] ['psychologist' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'professional Boundaries' 'cancellation of Registration' 'disqualification From Registration' 'prohibition Order' 'costs']

Source-derived case record

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 Proceedings Against a Psychologist Under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (nsw) / Stage 2 Protective Orders Following Stage 1 Findings of Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct and Professional Misconduct

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, if the respondent were still registered, the Tribunal would have suspended or cancelled his registration' 'Whether the respondent should be disqualified from being registered in the profession of psychology and for what period' 'Whether the respondent posed a substantial risk to the health of members of the public warranting a prohibition order' "Whether the respondent should pay the Health Care Complaints Commission's costs"]

Ratio Decidendi

The practitioner's serious and sustained misconduct involved a fundamental breach of trust, abuse of the power imbalance between psychologist and client, breaches of the APS Code of Ethics, and professional misconduct. He had been on notice about boundary and risk issues, demonstrated no real insight or genuine remorse, continued to deflect blame to Client A, and had not shown that any period of suspension would ensure safe practice. Public protection, deterrence, maintenance of professional standards and public confidence required a finding that his registration would have been cancelled, a five year disqualification, recording of the cancellation finding, a prohibition on providing...

Court Disposition

Protective orders made; respondent disqualified from registration as a psychologist for five years, prohibited from providing health services until reinstatement or other order, and ordered to pay the HCCC's costs.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 149C(4)(a) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW), if the respondent were still registered the Tribunal would have cancelled his registration.' 'Pursuant to s 149C(4)(b) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW), the respondent is disqualified from being registered in...