LCK v Health Ombudsman

Link copied
Case Copied 41 min read

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL


CITATION:

LCK v Health Ombudsman [2020] QCAT 316
PARTIES: LCK

(applicant)

v
HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR316-19

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

7 September 2020

HEARING DATE:

3 August 2020

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judicial Member D J McGill SC

Assisted by:

Dr Jules Black
Dr Jennifer Cavanagh

Ms Suzanne Harrop
ORDERS:

Orders made 3 August 2020:

1.   The conditions imposed by the respondent on the registration of the applicant be removed.

2.   There be no conditions imposed on the registration of the applicant.

3.   Until further order, no material about the proceeding be published except to enable the respondent to advise AHPRA of the decision of the Tribunal.

Further orders and directions made 7 September 2020:

1.   Order 3 made by the Tribunal on 3 August 2020 is set aside.

2.   Save as is necessary for the Office of the Health Ombudsman to provide information about this matter to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, until further order publication is prohibited, pursuant to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 s 66(1), of any medical reports about the applicant, and of:

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

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

to the extent that it would identify:

(c)    The applicant, or any member of his family;

(d)   Any victim of the applicant’s offending;

(e)    Any patient, family member of any patient or employee of the hospital where the applicant worked.

3.   Any submissions in writing in relation to costs by the applicant be filed and served within 21 days from the publication of these reasons.

4.   Any submissions in writing in response by the respondent be filed and served within 21 days from the service of the applicant’s submissions.

5.   Any submissions in writing in reply be filed and served within 14 days from the service of the respondent’s submissions.

6.   All questions of costs be decided by the Tribunal on the papers on a date to be fixed.
CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS - MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – OTHER MATTERS – immediate registration action – review by Tribunal – conviction of criminal offences – effect of mental illness – whether caused offending – whether mental health recovered – whether serious risk to persons – whether in the public interest to impose conditions – conditions removed.

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 s 4, s 58, s 63.

Allesch v Munch (2000) 203 CLR 172
Colagrande v Health Ombudsman [2017] QCAT 107
Farshchi v Medical Board of Australia [2018] VCAT 1619
Health Ombudsman v MacBean [2019] QCAT 300
Health Ombudsman v NLM (No 2) [2019] QCAT 366
Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506
HSK v Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia [2018] QCAT 418
JQB v Department of Justice and Regulation [2015] VCAT 1721
Kok v Medical Board of Australia [2020] VCAT 405
Legal Services Commissioner v XBN [2016] QCAT 471

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read LCK v Health Ombudsman and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2020] QCAT 316
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Health Ombudsman sought to impose conditions on the registration of Dr LCK following convictions for criminal offences. Dr LCK contested the imposition of conditions, contending that his mental illness caused his offending and that he had recovered from his illness. The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal was required to decide whether Dr LCK's mental illness was the cause of his offending, whether his mental illness had recovered, and whether it was in the public interest to impose conditions on his registration. The Tribunal found that Dr LCK's mental illness was not the cause of his offending. It also found that Dr LCK's mental health had recovered and that there was no serious risk of him offending again. The Tribunal found that it was in the public interest to remove the conditions imposed by the Health Ombudsman on Dr LCK's registration. The Tribunal ordered that the conditions be removed and that no further conditions be imposed on Dr LCK's registration. The Tribunal also made an order prohibiting publication of material about the proceeding that might identify Dr LCK, his family, any victims of his offending, any patients, family members of any patients, or employees of the hospital where Dr LCK worked.

Orders

Orders of the court

Orders made 3 August 2020:

1. The conditions imposed by the respondent on the registration of the applicant be removed.

2. There be no conditions imposed on the registration of the applicant.

3. Until further order, no material about the proceeding be published except to enable the respondent to advise AHPRA of the decision of the Tribunal.

Further orders and directions made 7 September 2020:

1. Order 3 made by the Tribunal on 3 August 2020 is set aside.

2. Save as is necessary for the Office of the Health Ombudsman to provide information about this matter to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, until further order publication is prohibited, pursuant to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 s 66(1), of any medical reports about the applicant, and of:

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

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

to the extent that it would identify:

(c) The applicant, or any member of his family;

(d) Any victim of the applicant’s offending;

(e) Any patient, family member of any patient or employee of the hospital where the applicant worked.

3. Any submissions in writing in relation to costs by the applicant be filed and served within 21 days from the publication of these reasons.

4. Any submissions in writing in response by the respondent be filed and served within 21 days from the service of the applicant’s submissions.

5. Any submissions in writing in reply be filed and served within 14 days from the service of the respondent’s submissions.

6. All questions of costs be decided by the Tribunal on the papers on a date to be fixed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.