Health Ombudsman v Jamieson

CITATION:

The Health Ombudsman v Jamieson [2017] QCAT 172

PARTIES:

The Health Ombudsman
(Applicant)

v

Stepheny Eliza Jamieson

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR228-16

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Hon J B Thomas AM QC, Judicial Member
Assisted by:
Mr Michael Halliday
Ms Ibi Patane
Ms Jocelyn Toohill

DELIVERED ON:

5 June 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.   A finding is recorded that the respondent on 15 July 2014 engaged in professional misconduct and that she engaged in unprofessional conduct that is substantially below the standard reasonably expected of a registered health practitioner of an equivalent level of training or experience;

2.   The respondent is reprimanded;

3.   It is ordered that there be no order for costs.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – DEPARTURE FROM ACCEPTED STANDARDS – where respondent practitioner stole three boxes of antibiotics from her place of employment – where the practitioner used the antibiotics to treat her son’s recurrent medical condition – where the respondent was convicted of 1 count of stealing as a servant in the Magistrates Court in relation to that conduct – where no conviction recorded in respect of that charge – where respondent failed to notify the National Board of that charge – where respondent made a false declaration when renewing her registration in respect of that charge – where respondent believed she did not need to disclose the charge as no conviction was recorded – whether the practitioner engaged in professional misconduct or unprofessional conduct – whether reprimand is an appropriate sanction – whether an order as to costs should be made

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) ss 97, 103(1)(a), 104, 107
Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009 (Qld) ss 5, 130(1), 130(3)(a)(i)
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 10, 16, 32

Health Ombudsman v Antley [2016] QCAT 472
Health Ombudsman v Macdonald [2016] QCAT 473

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Act’).

REASONS FOR DECISION

Jurisdiction

1. This is a disciplinary proceeding against a former registered nurse.

2. The incident that led to the proceeding occurred in 2014 when the respondent stole three boxes of antibiotics at Herberton Hospital where she worked.

3. The proceeding is a referral under section 103(1)(a) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (‘HO Act’) by the Health Ombudsman director of proceedings. This means that it is a proceeding in QCAT’s original jurisdiction under the QCAT Act.[1]

   [1]HO Act s 104(1); QCAT Act ss 10, 16.

4. Section 97 of the HO Act requires the Tribunal to be constituted by a judicial member, and division 6 of the QCAT Act requires assessors to be appointed to assist the Tribunal.

5. The decisions in orders that may be made are those stated in sections 107(2) and 107(3) of the HO Act.

Charges

1. There are three charges,…