20 Nov 2012
Q v LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER HC WN CIV-2012-485-1158
- Citation
- openlaw-4ba9be35_fecf_4514_91c7_0039c4fe4b03.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The Court held the Review Officer's findings that the practitioner's remarks, read in context and against a background of repeated complaints, could reasonably be construed as improper attacks on Dr Hegarty's reputation and motivated by collateral objectives were lawful and not unreasonable, so findings of breach of rr 13.8 and 2.3 stand; however the Review Officer erred in also charging breach of the general professionalism rule r 10 where more specific rules applied, so the r 10 finding is quashed; confidentiality under the Act does not permit automatic anonymisation in High Court judicial…