Haeck v Health Professions Council of South Africa (2021/11449) [2022] ZAGPJHC 690 (13 September 2022)

Haeck v Health Professions Council of South Africa (2021/11449) [2022] ZAGPJHC 690 (13 September 2022)

The court found that the HPCSA's preliminary enquiry committee failed to afford the applicant procedural fairness by not informing her of the specific issues under investigation, refusing legal representation, and denying her access to the expert's report before making a prima facie finding of guilt. The committee unlawfully outsourced its decision-making to an external expert and did not allow the applicant to respond to new allegations, violating her right to audi alteram partem. The internal appeal remedy under section 10(3) of the Health Professions Act was inadequate, as the appellate body would be confined to a tainted record, perpetuating the unfairness of the initial proceedings....

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 690
Parties
Applicant: Sandrina Valerie Phyllis Ludwig Haeck; Respondent: Health Professions Council of South Africa
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 September 2022
Case Number
2021/11449
Procedural Posture
Review Application / High Court Judgment on Application to Set Aside HPCSA Findings
Outcome
Application granted; HPCSA's findings set aside; applicant found not guilty; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
Crutchfield
Legal Topics
Audi Alteram Partem, Procedural Fairness, Internal Remedies, Health Professions Act, Review of Administrative Action
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Audi Alteram Partem Procedural Fairness Internal Remedies Health Professions Act Review of Administrative Action

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandrina Valerie Phyllis Ludwig Haeck

Applicant

Health Professions Council of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / High Court Judgment on Application to Set Aside HPCSA Findings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the HPCSA's preliminary enquiry committee violated the applicant's right to procedural fairness.
  2. 2 Whether the referral of the complaint to an external expert was lawful under the Health Professions Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was afforded an adequate opportunity to respond to all issues raised against her.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the HPCSA's preliminary enquiry committee failed to afford the applicant procedural fairness by not informing her of the specific issues under investigation, refusing legal representation, and denying her access to the expert's report before making a prima facie finding of guilt. The committee unlawfully outsourced its decision-making to an external expert and did not allow the applicant to respond to new allegations, violating her right to audi alteram partem. The internal appeal remedy under section 10(3) of the Health Professions Act was inadequate, as the appellate body would be confined to a tainted record, perpetuating the unfairness of the initial proceedings....

Court Disposition

Application granted; HPCSA's findings set aside; applicant found not guilty; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The HPCSA’s findings contained in the resolution letter dated 15 February 2021 are set aside and dismissed.
  • The applicant is found not guilty of the complaint laid against her.