The Applicant was a qualified medical practitioner, practicing as an employed radiologist. On 20 March 2017, the Respondent ordered that the Applicant's registration be suspended, effective immediately. The suspension arose from proceedings instituted under the National Law. These proceedings followed charges against the Applicant relating to a substantial quantity of threatening, intimidating and scandalous emails, alleged to have been sent by the Applicant to a former person with whom she had an association, to the current partner of that person and to other persons. Charges also involved the breach of an apprehended violence order issued against the Applicant by the former partner and the father of the alleged victim's new partner.
On 28 February 2017, the New South Wales Police issued a Court Attendance Notice, detailing nine criminal charges against the Applicant, relating to the above conduct. On 20 March 2017, the Respondent convened a hearing to determine whether conduct existed which justified the Respondent taking action. The Respondent made a decision on the same day as the hearing, with written reasons for that decision being published on 5 May 2017.
The Respondent found, inter alia, that the allegations made against the Applicant indicated a significant risk that she had acted in ways that damage the standing of the medical profession. Although these matters are dealt with in the Courts, the Respondent determined there was a need to maintain public confidence in the profession and in the operation and management of the health system. The Respondent determined that the conduct of the Applicant, although not occurring in the conduct of her practice, could be a significant risk to the health and safety of the public if directed at patients. In the circumstances, the Respondent felt there were no conditions which would be adequate to protect the reputation and standing of the medical profession and public confidence in the application of the National Law.
The Applicant filed for a Stay or Interim Order on 7 July 2017, seeking a stay of the suspension pending determination of her appeal. The grounds of the appeal allege the decision is wrong and that the complaints do not arise from or relate to the Applicant's professional practice and are not related to her professional conduct.
Findings
The Tribunal was not asked to make any orders but rather to make a decision as to whether a stay was warranted. The Tribunal noted that the decision of the Respondent was to protect the public. In doing so, no particular patient requiring specific protection was identified. The Tribunal came to the determination that a stay was warranted. The Tribunal ordered that the decision of the Respondent to suspend the Applicant's registration be stayed pending further orders. This stay was conditional upon the Applicant conducting any radiological practice without contacting directly any clients or patients apart from personally conducting necessary tests or procedures on them or with them as part of their treatment or procedure. These conditions applied unless there was a medical emergency and the referring health practitioner was unable to be contacted.
The Tribunal decided that the interim non-publication order made in respect of the Applicant and other persons who were recipients of emails be vacated. This was because the Tribunal was of the opinion that the order was not necessary for the administration of justice and that the overriding principle of open justice should prevail.
Click here for full decision
