Health Ombudsman v JKR

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Health Ombudsman v JKR [2022] QCAT 29

PARTIES:

HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(applicant)

v

JKR

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR390-20

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

17 February 2022 (ex tempore)

HEARING DATE:

17 February 2022

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judicial Member J Robertson

Assisted by:

Mr Brent Dixon
Ms Suzanne Harrop

Ms Sharyn Hopkins

ORDERS:

1. Pursuant to section 107(2)(b)(iii) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013, the Tribunal decides that the respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct

2. Pursuant to section 107(3)(a) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013, the respondent is reprimanded

3. Pursuant to section 66 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), publication of

(a)     the contents of a document or thing being produced at the Tribunal;

(b)     evidence given before the Tribunal; and

(c)     any order made or reasons given by the Tribunal

is prohibited to the extent that it could identify or rear to the identification of the Respondent in these proceedings, save as is necessary for the parties to engage in this proceeding or any appeal therefrom, or for the applicant to advise the Australian Health Practitioners regulatory Authority of the outcome of this proceeding.

4.     No order as to costs.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – NURSES – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – where the respondent was at all times a registered nurse – where the respondent is not currently working as a registered nurse – where the respondent was charged and convicted on his own pleas of guilty of criminal offences for dishonesty - where the respondent has a history of mental health conditions – whether the respondent should be reprimanded

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – where a non-publication order was sought by the respondent to avoid endangering the respondent’s mental health – where the non-publication order was not opposed by the applicant – whether the non-publication order should be granted

Health Ombudsman Act2013 (Qld) s 103, 104, 107

Health Practitioner Regulation National Law 2009 (Queensland) s 5

Queensland Civil and Administrative Act 2019 (Qld) s 66

Health Ombudsman v Cassingham [2019] QCAT 358

Health Ombudsman v Mullins [2019] QCAT 339

Health Ombudsman v Park [2021] QCAT 309

Health Ombudsman v Wrede [2019] QCAT 356

Medical Board of Australia v Anwar (No. 2) (Review and Regulation) [2020] VCAT 462

Medical Board of Australia v Anwar (Review and Regulation) [2019] VCAT 1803

Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia v Brocklehurst [2011] QCAT 71

Occupational Therapy Board of Australia v Cornelio (Review and Regulation) [2019] VCAT 20

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	M Price, instructed by Office of the Health Ombudsman
Respondent:	Self-represented

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. By application filed on 18 December 2020, the Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman (the applicant) referred disciplinary proceedings involving the respondent pursuant to sections 103 and 104 of the Health Ombudsman Act2013 (The HO Act) to the Tribunal.

2. The referral contains one allegation against the…