AL-NASER v MEDICAL BOARD OF AUSTRALIA (No. 2) (Occupational Discipline)

In the matter of Al-Naser v Medical Board of Australia (No. 2), the Tribunal heard an appeal against the decision of the Medical Board of Australia (the Board) to impose certain conditions on the registration of Dr Al-Naser, a medical practitioner. The Board had imposed conditions on Dr Al-Naser's registration following a finding that he had engaged in professional misconduct in relation to a sexual relationship with a patient. The Tribunal was asked to review the decision of the Board and determine whether the conditions imposed were appropriate and proportionate to the findings of professional misconduct.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the conditions imposed by the Board were appropriate and proportionate to the findings of professional misconduct against Dr Al-Naser. The Tribunal noted that the Board had the power to impose conditions on a practitioner's registration where it was satisfied that the practitioner had engaged in professional misconduct. The Tribunal also noted that the Board had a duty to protect the public and maintain public confidence in the medical profession. The Tribunal considered whether the conditions imposed by the Board were necessary to achieve these objectives and whether they were proportionate to the findings of professional misconduct.

The Tribunal found that the conditions imposed by the Board were appropriate and proportionate to the findings of professional misconduct against Dr Al-Naser. The Tribunal noted that the Board had carefully considered the evidence before it and had imposed conditions that were designed to protect the public and maintain public confidence in the medical profession. The Tribunal also noted that the conditions imposed were not overly restrictive and allowed Dr Al-Naser to continue practising medicine in a supervised environment. The Tribunal concluded that the Board had exercised its powers reasonably and that the conditions imposed were appropriate and proportionate to the findings of professional misconduct.

The Tribunal varied the decision of the Board by amending the gender-based restriction condition to clarify the definitions of certain terms and to provide greater certainty to Dr Al-Naser. The Tribunal also ordered that Dr Al-Naser must comply with the Gender-based restriction protocol in force at the date these conditions are imposed and then as amended from time to time. Dr Al-Naser was also required to provide acknowledgement, on the approved form (GBR-1) that they had read and understood the Gender-based restriction protocol and were aware of the definition of ‘patient’, ‘practise’, ‘practice location’, ‘male’, ‘female’, and ‘contact’ as detailed in this condition. Additionally, Dr Al-Naser was required to provide to AHPRA, on the approved form (HPC), the contact details of a senior person, such as the Director of Medical Services or equivalent (the senior person) at each current place of practice. The Tribunal also ordered that all costs associated with compliance with the conditions on Dr Al-Naser's registration were at his own expense.