QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION:
Health Ombudsman v Eggerling [2022] QCAT 80
PARTIES:
HEALTH OMBUDSMAN (applicant)
v
DARREN WILLIAM EGGERLING (respondent)
APPLICATION NO/S:
OCR303-20
MATTER TYPE:
Occupational regulation matters
DELIVERED ON:
17 February 2022
HEARING DATE:
17 February 2022
HEARD AT:
Brisbane
DECISION OF:
Judicial Member J Robertson
Assisted by:
Mr Brent Dixon
Ms Suzanne HarropMs Sharyn Hopkins
ORDERS:
1. A finding that the conduct of the Respondent constitutes professional misconduct pursuant to section 107(2)(b)(iii) of the Health Ombudsman Act2013 (Qld).
2. Pursuant to section 107(3)(a) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) that the Respondent be reprimanded.
3. Each party must bear their own costs for the proceedings.
CATCHWORDS:
PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – NURSES – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT – where the respondent was a registered nurse – where the respondent failed to maintain professional boundaries by engaging in a sexual relationship with a patient – where the respondent admits the allegations but otherwise has not engaged in the disciplinary proceedings – whether a reprimand and/or three month period of suspension is appropriate
Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) s 107
Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland) (National Law) s 5, s 41
Health Ombudsman v Bothwell [2020] QCAT 393
Health Ombudsman v Evans [2016] QCAT 77
Health Ombudsman v HSK [2018] QCAT 419
Health Ombudsman v Jolley [2019] QCAT 173
Health Ombudsman v Wood [2019] QCAT 35
APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)
REASONS FOR DECISION
On 29 September 2020, the Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman (the applicant) referred these disciplinary proceedings to the Tribunal. The referral contains one allegation; that over a period from 1 May 2019 until approximately 28 June 2019, the respondent, a registered nurse then employed at a medical centre in Morayfield, failed to maintain professional boundaries with a female patient (patient A).
The relevant conduct and background
On 1 May 2019, patient A attended the practice for medical treatment in relation to an injury to her foot. During this attendance the respondent provided clinical care and treatment to patient A, including administering pain relief and saline. On 9 May 2019, patient A attended the practice, and the respondent applied a cast to patient A’s lower leg.
On a date in early May 2019, the respondent gave patient A his phone number and/or patient A gave the respondent her phone number. Commencing on a date in early May 2019 until at or around the end of May 2019, the respondent and patient A exchanged text messages of a personal nature.
At around the end of May 2019, the respondent and patient A arranged by text message to meet to have sexual intercourse. At around the end of May 2019, the respondent and patient A meet at the respondent’s home and had sexual intercourse.
On 14 June 2019, patient A attended the clinic after…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Health Ombudsman v Eggerling and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2022] QCAT 80
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The tribunal found that Eggerling's actions were indeed in breach of the professional standards expected of a registered nurse. By exchanging personal text messages with patient A and engaging in sexual activity with her, Eggerling had clearly violated the professional boundaries necessary to maintain trust and ethical standards in the nurse-patient relationship. The tribunal highlighted that the nature and duration of the inappropriate relationship, along with Eggerling's position of power and trust as a healthcare provider, compounded the seriousness of the misconduct. The tribunal concluded that Eggerling's conduct warranted disciplinary action. The tribunal decided that Eggerling's registration as a nurse should be suspended for a period of six months, starting from the date of the tribunal's decision.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.