Grant v Health Ombudsman

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Grant v Health Ombudsman [2024] QSC 146

PARTIES:

DONALD ARCHIBALD GRANT

(applicant)
v
HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(first respondent) and

DIRECTOR OF PROCEEDINGS, OFFICE OF THE HEALTH OMBUDSMAN
(second respondent)

FILENO/S:

BS No 1646 of 2023

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court of Queensland at Brisbane

DELIVEREDON:

12 July 2024

DELIVEREDAT:

Brisbane

HEARINGDATE:

14 December 2023

JUDGE:

Brown J

ORDER:

1.   Grounds 5, 6A and 7 to 9A of the further amended application should be dismissed.

2.   Costs should follow the event.

3.   The parties notify the court within 14 days if the judgment contains any matter which is subject to confidentiality orders previously made.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – JURISDICTION – PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – PROCEEDINGS BEFORE  BOARDS,  TRIBUNALS,  ETC  –  where  the

applicant is a psychiatrist who was regularly engaged to provide medical-legal reports in different types of court proceedings – where the applicant published a book which contained information he obtained in the course of preparing his reports for the courts – where a number of complaints were made to the Ombudsman under the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) – where the Ombudsman referred the complaints to the Director – where the Director referred the matter to the

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal – where the applicant submits that the Ombudsman and Director lacked jurisdiction under the Act to make the respective referrals – whether the complaints were complaints “about a health service or other service” within the meaning of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) – whether the complaints were “voluntary notifications” within the meaning of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland) - whether jurisdictional facts or subjective jurisdictional facts exist to found jurisdiction

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – JUDICIAL REVIEW – THE OMBUDSMAN – REASONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE

DECISIONS – where the applicant requested a statement of reasons in relation to the referral of the complaints to the Director and the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal – whether the referral decisions are decisions to which the obligation to provide reasons applies

Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld)

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) ss 3, 4, 7, 31, 35, 36, 37,

38, 39, 40, 44, 90, 103, 104

Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland)

ss 3A, 144, 145, 146, 149, 150, 237

Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) ss 26, 31, 32, 38, 46
Mental Health Act 1974 (Qld)

Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld)
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld)

Adamson v New South Wales Rugby League Ltd (1991) 31 FCR 242; [1991] FCA 425

Byrne v Marles (2008) 19 VR 612; [2008] VSCA 78

EHF17 v Minister for Immigration & Border Protection

(2019) 272 FCR 409; [2019] FCA 1681, cited

Electrical Licensing Committee v Whatalec Pty Ltd; Electrical Licensing Committee v Brindley (2021) 8 QR 328;

[2021] QSC 159, considered

Gold Coast City v Satellite & Wireless Pty Ltd (2014) 220 FCR 412; [2014] FCAFC 51, considered

Hocking…