STATEMENT

Fair Work Act 2009
s.739 - Application to deal with a dispute

Mr Phill Tsingos
v
Holy Spirit Northside Private Hospital Ltd
(C2015/7955)

COMMISSIONER BOOTH

BRISBANE, 8 JUNE 2016

Alleged dispute about the alleged discriminatory treatment of Mr Tsingos.

[1] This Statement concerns an application by Mr Phill Tsingos for the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) to deal with a dispute arising under the Holy Spirit Northside and QNU – Nurses Enterprise Agreement 2012-2015 (the Agreement). The Agreement is an enterprise agreement, and includes a term that provides a procedure for dealing with disputes, for the purposes of s.738(b) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). Section 738 requires or allows the Commission to deal with the dispute.

Purpose of the Statement

[2] The purpose of this Statement is to document the outcomes of conciliation conferences held on the 3 February 2016 and ending on the 19 May 2016 to deal with the dispute.

Background

[3] Mr Tsingos was suspended from duties following an allegation of a breach of the Code of Conduct as a result of Mr Tsingos seeking to conduct a media interview. Mr Tsingos did not conduct the interview.

Outcome

[4] Following the conciliation conducted by the Commission the parties have agreed as follows:

(i) It is now agreed by the parties that the media interview has not resulted in any disciplinary action against Mr Tsingos.

(ii) Disciplinary action has been removed from Mr Tsingos’ employee file.

(iii) Mr Tsingos’ behaviour did not warrant a first and final warning and as such the first and final warning has been revoked.

(iv) Mr Tsingos will be paid wages lost by virtue of his suspension.

(v) The parties are willing to work together going forward therefore as part of this agreement, the parties will enter into discussions auspiced by the Commission in relation to Mr Tsingos’ role as a delegate on behalf of the Nurses Professional Association of Queensland Inc. at the hospital.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr Phill Tsingos, a patient, brought proceedings against Holy Spirit Northside Private Hospital Ltd, a medical facility, in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Mr Tsingos claimed that he had been subjected to discriminatory treatment by the hospital in relation to his care, which included allegations of a failure to provide adequate medical treatment and an inadequate response to his complaints. The hospital denied these allegations and argued that the care provided was appropriate and in line with medical standards. The court was required to determine whether the hospital had indeed acted in a discriminatory manner and whether the treatment provided was substandard.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the hospital's conduct amounted to discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and whether the hospital had breached its duty of care owed to Mr Tsingos. The court examined the evidence and submissions from both parties to determine whether the hospital's actions were discriminatory and whether they fell below the standard of care expected in the medical profession. The court also considered the impact of the alleged discriminatory treatment on Mr Tsingos and whether there was a causal link between the hospital's conduct and any harm suffered by the patient.

After evaluating the evidence and arguments presented, the court concluded that the hospital had not acted in a discriminatory manner and that the care provided met the required standard. The court found that while Mr Tsingos had experienced dissatisfaction with his treatment, this did not equate to discriminatory treatment under the Act. Furthermore, the court held that the hospital had not breached its duty of care, as the treatment provided was in accordance with medical standards. Consequently, the court dismissed Mr Tsingos' claims against the hospital. The Federal Circuit Court ordered that Mr Tsingos pay the hospital's costs of the proceeding.

Mr Phill Tsingos v Holy Spirit Northside Private Hospital Ltd

STATEMENT

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established