Minister for Health v. Thomson, R.L. [1985] FCA 259

Procedural Posture

Appeal Concerning a Health Insurance Act 1973 Medical Services Review Determination / Appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia From a Single Judge

Legal Issues

1. 1 ["Whether the Minister's reference to the Medical Services Committee of Inquiry was authorised by s.82 of the Health Insurance Act 1973 despite not using the exact statutory wording for excessive services." 'Whether the terms of the reference wrongly cast an onus of proof on Dr Thomson.' 'Whether the Committee denied Dr Thomson natural justice by relying on its own expertise and views about appropriate frequency of medical services without disclosing them during the hearing.' 'Whether the Medical Services Review Tribunal had power to admit new evidence not before the Committee.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Minister's reference was within s.82(b) of the Health Insurance Act 1973 because it concerned whether identified professional services were reasonably necessary for adequate medical care, a matter relevant to the Act and sufficiently connected with the statutory concept of excessive services. The formulation did not invalidate the inquiry or misdirect the Committee as to onus. The expert Committee did not deny natural justice by using its own expertise and judgment without first disclosing every tentative view or standard to Dr Thomson. The Tribunal had no power to admit new evidence. The appeal was therefore allowed and the Minister's determination affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of Sweeney J set aside; order of the Medical Services Review Tribunal set aside; determination of the Minister for Health affirmed.

Orders

• ['The appeal be allowed.' 'The order of Sweeney J. be set aside.' 'The order of the Medical Services Review Tribunal be set aside.' 'The determination of the Minister for Health be affirmed.' "The respondent pay the appellant's costs of both the appeal and the application to Sweeney J."]