Medical Board of Australia v Gallery

The Tribunal was required to decide a case brought by the Medical Board of Australia against Dr Gallery, who was the Director of Surgery at the Mt Isa Base Hospital. The Board brought the case in response to complaints about Dr Gallery's treatment of three patients, two of whom died as a result of their treatment. Dr Gallery admitted that his treatment of two of the patients constituted unsatisfactory professional conduct, and the Tribunal found this to be the case after hearing expert evidence. The Tribunal was also required to decide whether there were grounds to take disciplinary action against Dr Gallery and, if so, what sanction to impose.

The Tribunal accepted Dr Gallery's admission that his treatment of two patients constituted unsatisfactory professional conduct. It also found that there were grounds to take disciplinary action against him, and that his undertaking to never reapply for registration as a medical practitioner and to never seek to be relieved of that undertaking was an appropriate sanction. The Tribunal also decided that publication of the medical records of the patients involved in these proceedings was not in the public interest, and made a non-publication order to prevent access to those records without leave of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal made an order that Dr Gallery must pay two-thirds of the Board's costs of the proceedings, assessed against the District Court scale on the standard basis, if not agreed. The Tribunal also accepted Dr Gallery's undertaking to never reapply for registration as a medical practitioner and to never seek to be relieved of his undertaking. The Tribunal made a non-publication order to prevent access to the medical records of the patients involved in these proceedings without leave of the Tribunal. The Tribunal also accepted Dr Gallery's acknowledgement that there was a need for earlier surgical intervention in the case of the third patient, FMN, and his expression of regret for not having done so.

In summary, the Tribunal found that Dr Gallery's treatment of two patients constituted unsatisfactory professional conduct, and that there were grounds to take disciplinary action against him. The Tribunal accepted Dr Gallery's undertaking to never reapply for registration as a medical practitioner and to never seek to be relieved of that undertaking, and made a non-publication order to prevent access to the medical records of the patients involved in these proceedings without leave of the Tribunal. The Tribunal also accepted Dr Gallery's acknowledgement that there was a need for earlier surgical intervention in the case of the third patient, FMN, and his expression of regret for not having done so. The Tribunal ordered Dr Gallery to pay two-thirds of the Board's costs of the proceedings, assessed against the District Court scale on the standard basis, if not agreed.