Quach v Health Care Complaints Commission [2015] NSWCA 187

Quach v Health Care Complaints Commission [2015] NSWCA 187

The stay was refused because the cancellation order had operated immediately and had no continuing operation to stay; in any event, the serious findings of professional misconduct, impairment and lack of competence, the protective purpose of s 149C of the National Law, and the availability of a statutory appeal would have led the Court not to exercise any discretion to grant a stay. The extension of time was refused because the plaintiff sought to defer any appeal until after judicial review, brought the application by motion rather than by summons seeking leave to appeal, did not identify proposed appeal grounds, and gave no adequate basis for the delay.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Proceedings Under S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw), With Interlocutory Motions for a Stay and Extension of Time for Appeal / Court of Appeal Ruling on Plaintiff's Notices of Motion Filed on 4 May 2015 and 23 June 2015
Outcome
Plaintiff's notices of motion dismissed with costs payable to the second defendant.
Legal Topics
['stay Pending Judicial Review' 'extension of Time for Appeal' 'statutory Appeal From Ncat' 'cancellation of Medical Practitioner Registration' 'professional Misconduct and Impairment']
['procedure' 'administrative Law' 'health Practitioner Regulation'] ['stay Pending Judicial Review' 'extension of Time for Appeal' 'statutory Appeal From Ncat' 'cancellation of Medical Practitioner Registration' 'professional Misconduct and Impairment']

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

Judicial Review Proceedings Under S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (nsw), With Interlocutory Motions for a Stay and Extension of Time for Appeal / Court of Appeal Ruling on Plaintiff's Notices of Motion Filed on 4 May 2015 and 23 June 2015

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether NCAT's order cancelling the plaintiff's registration should be stayed pending judicial review." "Whether the plaintiff should be granted an extension of time for an appeal described as a merits review of NCAT's decisions." "Whether orders declaring NCAT's decisions void or registering the plaintiff unconditionally could be made on the interlocutory motions."]

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was refused because the cancellation order had operated immediately and had no continuing operation to stay; in any event, the serious findings of professional misconduct, impairment and lack of competence, the protective purpose of s 149C of the National Law, and the availability of a statutory appeal would have led the Court not to exercise any discretion to grant a stay. The extension of time was refused because the plaintiff sought to defer any appeal until after judicial review, brought the application by motion rather than by summons seeking leave to appeal, did not identify proposed appeal grounds, and gave no adequate basis for the delay.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's notices of motion dismissed with costs payable to the second defendant.

Orders

  • ["Dismiss the plaintiff's notices of motion filed on 4 May 2015 and 23 June 2015." "Order the plaintiff to pay the second defendant's costs of those motions." 'Direct that the second defendant serve on the plaintiff and provide to my Associate by 5pm on 10 July 2015 written submissions (not to exceed three pages)...