Jaravaza v Medical Board of Australia (No. 2)

[2013] QCAT 475

CITATION: Jaravaza v Medical Board of Australia (No. 2) [2013] QCAT 475

PARTIES:	Vengesai Stein Jaravaza (Applicant)
v
Medical Board of Australia (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:   OCR318-12

MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE: 26 July 2013

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Judge Alexander Horneman-Wren SC, Deputy President

DELIVERED ON: 26 July 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:     

IT IS THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT:

1.    The stay order of 21 December 2012 will cease to have effect as at 5:00 pm on 23 August 2013.

2. Pursuant to s 46 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act) Dr Jaravaza has leave to withdraw his application to review a decision filed on 2 October 2012.

3. Pursuant to s 61 of the QCAT Act, compliance with rule 58 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 is waived.

THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT:

1.    The Medical Board must file in the Tribunal and give to Dr Jaravaza any application in respect of costs and any submissions in support of that application, by; 4:00 pm on 2 August 2013.

2.    Dr Jaravaza must file in the Tribunal and give to the Board any submissions in reply, by; 4:00 pm on 9 August 2013.

3.    Any application filed in accordance with direction 1, above, will be determined on the papers without an oral hearing.

CATCHWORDS : 

HEALTH PROFESSIONALS – MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – LICENCES AND REGISTRATION – where the registrant sought a review of the Board’s decision to refuse to renew his limited registration – where the registrant sought a stay of the Board’s decision – where the Tribunal granted the stay of the decision – where the registrant subsequent to the decision failed to pass an examination for general registration – where the registrant sought to withdraw his application to review at the directions hearing – where the registrant sought time in which to wind up his practice in an area of need – whether the Tribunal should grant leave to withdraw in the absence of a formal application – whether the Tribunal should allow the registrant time in which to close his practice

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 46
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009, r 58

Jaravaza v Medical Board of Australia [2013] QCAT 044, cited

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:	V S Jaravaza by phone
RESPONDENT:	C Templeton of Rodgers Barnes & Green

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1]On 26 July 2013 at a directions hearing the Tribunal made orders granting Dr Jaravaza leave to withdraw his application and directions for the filing of an application and submissions on costs. The Tribunal gave ex tempore reasons. Those reasons were as follows.

[2]By letter dated 3 September 2012, Dr Jaravza was notified of the Queensland Board of the Medical Board of Australia’s decision at a meeting on 14 August 2012, to refuse his application for renewal of limited registration for practise in an area of need in Gin Gin, Queensland.  Dr Jaravaza, by application filed on 2 October 2012, sought to review that decision.

[3]The effect of the Board’s decision was that Dr Jaravaza was no longer able to practise as a medical practitioner in Australia and was required to cease all practice immediately.  He was also informed that his name would be removed from the register of medical practitioners at the close of business the following day, 4 September 2012.  By application filed on 19 November 2012, Dr Jaravaza sought a stay of the Board’s decision. 

[4]On 21 December 2012, the Tribunal, constituted by me, ordered that the decision of the Medical Board of Australia, made on 14 August 2012, to refuse to renew the limited registration of Dr Jaravaza, be stayed until the determination of his application to review that decision, or earlier order of the Tribunal.[1] 

[1]        Jaravaza v Medical Board of Australia [2013] QCAT 044.

[5]The decision was made in the context of Dr Jaravaza proposing to sit an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) examination in May of 2013.  At a directions hearing on 26 July 2013, the Board filed, by leave, an affidavit of Christopher Dan Templeton, sworn 26 July 2013, exhibiting certain correspondence which had passed between the solicitors for the Medical Board of Australia, Dr Jaravaza and his former solicitors between 27 February 2013 and 19 July 2013. 

[6]Dr Jaravaza’s former solicitors, Fragomen, notified the Tribunal by letter dated 12 July 2013 that they no longer acted for Dr Jaravaza. 

[7]One of the issues raised by Mr Templeton at the directions hearing was the fact that the Board was unaware of whether or not Dr Jaravaza sat the OSCE examination in May 2013, the results of which were available on 14 June 2013 and, if so, what the result of that examination was.  The Board was able to discern, from the published results which indicate successful candidates by medical registration number, that Dr Jaravaza’s registration number did not appear as one of the successful candidates in that examination. 

[8]In response to those issues, when raised, Dr Jaravaza informed the Tribunal that, in fact, he did sit the exam in May 2013 but was, again, unsuccessful.  In light of that, Dr Jaravaza has, this morning, informed me that he no longer intends to contest the decision of the Medical Board of Australia in respect of his application for renewal of registration and does not wish to pursue the proceedings further. 

[9]Dr Jaravaza raised concern with the ability for him to wind up his practice.  Dr Jaravaza indicated that he would seek a period of a month within which to do that.  Mr Templeton, on behalf of the Board, candidly conceded that such a request is not unreasonable in the circumstances.  In those circumstances the Tribunal made orders, the effect of which will be that its stay of the decision will cease as at 5 pm on Friday 23 August 2013.  The Tribunal also made an order that Dr Jaravaza has leave to withdraw his application,  the Tribunal waived compliance with rule 58 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 in that regard and leave was granted pursuant to s 46 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 for that to occur.

Subsequent events

[10]After the delivery of the Tribunal’s ex tempore reasons Dr Jaravaza, on 2 August 2013, filed an affidavit in which he affirms and declares:

I withdraw my “Stay application” as discussed in more detail on 26^th July 200013 (sic).

[11]Lest it be thought from this that the application which Dr Jaravaza informed the Tribunal in the directions hearing that he no longer wished to pursue was only his application for a stay of a decisions, rather than his substantive application, this was not the case. I have reviewed the recording of the proceedings. The Tribunal was clear in establishing with Dr Jaravaza that he no longer wished to contest the Board’s decision to refuse the renewal of his registration.

[12]Therefore, it is clear to me that Dr Jaravaza’s reference to his “stay application” is merely a misdescription of the proceedings which were discussed in the directions hearing.