Health Ombudsman v Tang

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Health Ombudsman v Niem Quoc Tang [2020] QCAT 165

PARTIES:

HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(applicant)

v

NIEM QUOC TANG

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR285-18

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DATE OF DECISION:

5 May 2020

DATE OF REASONS:

On the papers

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judge Allen QC, Deputy President

Assisted by:
Ms H Barker
Mr K Murphy
Dr A Tuckett

ORDERS:

1. As regards Charge 1, pursuant to s 107(2)(b)(iii) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld), the Tribunal finds that the respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct.

2. As regards Charge 2, pursuant to s 107(2)(b)(ii) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld), the Tribunal finds that the respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes unprofessional conduct.

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

4.   Each party to the proceeding must bear the party’s own costs for the proceeding.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – NURSES – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – where the respondent was a enrolled nurse – where the respondent committed criminal offences of dishonesty – whether such conduct should be characterised as professional misconduct or unprofessional conduct – where the respondent contravened s 130 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law by failing to notify the Nursing and Midwifery Board within 7 days of a relevant event – whether such conduct should be characterised as unprofessional conduct – what sanction should be imposed for professional misconduct and unprofessional conduct

Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland), s 5, s 130

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld), s 103, s 104, s 107

Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia v McKenzie [2011] QCAT 338

Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia v Hundy [2013] QCAT 691

Health Ombudsman v Armstrong [2018] QCAT 382

Health Ombudsman v Chaffey [2020] QCAT 54

Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia v Williams [2013] SAHPT 1

Fittock v Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner (No 2) [2015] SASCFC 167

REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	The Director of Proceedings, on behalf of the Health Ombudsman
Respondent:	BCE Law
APPEARANCES:	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

1. The Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman (“the applicant”) has referred a matter regarding Niem Quoc Tang (“the respondent”) to the Tribunal pursuant to s 103(1)(a) and s 104 of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld). The applicant seeks findings that the respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct and unprofessional conduct and consequent orders for sanction. There is no dispute between the parties as to the relevant facts of the matter or as to appropriate orders by way of the sanction. There is a dispute between the parties as to the proper characterisation of one of the charges against the respondent and whether such admitted conduct should be characterised as professional misconduct…