Ibrahim v Medical Board of Australia

The appeal concerned an application for limited registration as a medical practitioner in an area of need under the *Health Practitioner Regulation National Law*. The appellant, Dr Ibrahim, sought to challenge a decision of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) which found that his previous activities did not satisfy the approved recency of practice registration standard. The appeal was heard by Macfarlan and Gleeson JJA, and Simpson J.

The central legal issue before the court was whether NCAT had erroneously narrowed the ambit of the definition of ‘practice’ as contained within the relevant registration standard. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the appellant’s employment as a medical receptionist, a pathology collector, and his undertaking of observerships constituted ‘practice’ for the purposes of satisfying the recency of practice requirements for limited registration.

The Court of Appeal affirmed NCAT’s finding that the appellant’s activities did not meet the definition of ‘practice’ under the registration standard. The court reasoned that the standard required active engagement in clinical duties and the application of medical knowledge and skills in a professional capacity, which was not demonstrated by the appellant’s roles as a receptionist or pathology collector, nor by his observerships. These activities were found to be preparatory or ancillary rather than constituting actual medical practice. Consequently, the appellant was found to be ineligible for limited registration.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the Medical Board of Australia.