de Bono v Health Care Complaints Commission [2023] NSWCATOD 172

de Bono v Health Care Complaints Commission [2023] NSWCATOD 172

The Tribunal affirmed the interim prohibition order because the consistent accounts of three alleged victims supported findings that the Applicant engaged in inappropriate massage conduct, including unnecessary exposure, lack of consent and communication, and pulling down clients' underwear. Those findings established a breach of the Code of Conduct requirement to provide health services in a safe and ethical manner and showed that the Applicant posed a serious risk to the health or safety of members of the public, making the interim prohibition order necessary for public protection.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of a Decision to Make an Interim Prohibition Order Under S 41 AA of the Health Care Complaints Act 1993 (nsw) / Principal Judgment
Outcome
The decision the subject of the review was affirmed.
Legal Topics
['massage Therapist' 'non Registered Health Practitioner' 'interim Prohibition Order' 'code of Conduct' 'serious Risk to Health or Safety of the Public' 'client Consent and Professional Boundaries']
['health Law' 'administrative Law' 'occupational Regulation and Discipline'] ['massage Therapist' 'non Registered Health Practitioner' 'interim Prohibition Order' 'code of Conduct' 'serious Risk to Health or Safety of the Public' 'client Consent and Professional Boundaries']

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

Administrative Review of a Decision to Make an Interim Prohibition Order Under S 41 AA of the Health Care Complaints Act 1993 (nsw) / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Applicant breached the Code of Conduct for non-registered health practitioners by failing to provide health services in a safe and ethical manner.' 'Whether the Applicant posed a serious risk to the health or safety of members of the public.' 'Whether making an interim prohibition order was necessary to protect the health or safety of members of the public.' "Whether the Commission's decision to make the interim prohibition order should be affirmed on administrative review."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal affirmed the interim prohibition order because the consistent accounts of three alleged victims supported findings that the Applicant engaged in inappropriate massage conduct, including unnecessary exposure, lack of consent and communication, and pulling down clients' underwear. Those findings established a breach of the Code of Conduct requirement to provide health services in a safe and ethical manner and showed that the Applicant posed a serious risk to the health or safety of members of the public, making the interim prohibition order necessary for public protection.

Court Disposition

The decision the subject of the review was affirmed.

Orders

  • ['The decision the subject of this review is affirmed.' 'Pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the disclosure of the names of the First Alleged Victim, the Second Alleged Victim and the Third Alleged Victim is prohibited.' 'Pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative...