Health Ombudsman v JLK

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Health Ombudsman v JLK [2020] QCAT 487

PARTIES:

DIRETOR OF PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(applicant)

v

JLK

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR142-18

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

18 December 2020

HEARING DATE:

12 November 2020

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judicial Member D J McGill SC,
Assisted by:
Dr F Walden,
Dr E Chew,
Ms J Stuckey. 

ORDERS:

1.   The Tribunal decides that the respondent has behaved in a way that constituted professional misconduct, in that he engaged in conduct that is substantially below the standard reasonably expected of a registered health practitioner of an equivalent level or training or experience. 

2.   The respondent is reprimanded. 

3.   The parties bear their own costs of the proceeding.

4.   Pursuant to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 s 66, publication is prohibited of:

(a)    The contents of a document or thing produced to the Tribunal; and

(b)   Any order made or reasons given by the Tribunal; and

(c)    Evidence given before the Tribunal,

to the extent that it could identify, or lead to the identification of, the respondent, any family member of the respondent, any patient or former patient of the respondent, or any family member of any patient or former patient of the respondent, 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. 

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – DEPARTURE FROM ACCEPTED STANDARDS – boundary violation – psychiatrist having personal and sexual relationship with vulnerable patient – whether professional misconduct – sanction – effect of mental health condition at relevant time – effect of voluntary withdrawal from practice – effect of delay – other matters – no suspension imposed – non-publication order. 

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 s 103(1), s 104, s 107.

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 s 66

Health Ombudsman v Bricknell [2019] QCAT 340
Health Ombudsman v CLT (No 2) [2019] QCAT 379
Health Ombudsman v Kimpton [2018] QCAT 271
Health Ombudsman v Mutasa [2019] QCAT 315
LCK v Health Ombudsman [2020] QCAT 316
Legal Services Commission v XBV [2018] QCAT 332
Medical Board of Australia v Blomeley [2014] QCAT 160
Medical Board of Australia v DEL [2019] QCAT 63
Medical Board of Australia v Leggett [2015] QCAT 240
Medical Board of Australia v Nadam [2011] QCAT 65
Medical Board of Australia v Waldron [2017] QCAT 443
Medical Board of Queensland v Quan [2006] QHPT 5
Naidu v Medical Board of Australia [2016] NTSC 8
Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia v Roe [2018] WASAT 92
Psychology Board of Australia v GA [2014] QCAT 409
Psychology Board of Australia v Garcia [2015] VCAT 128

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	C Wilson, instructed by the Office of the Health Ombudsman.
Respondent:	J R Jones, instructed by Avant…