Queensland Nursing Council v Dodd

[2010] QDC 220

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Queensland Nursing Council v Dodd [2010] QDC 220

PARTIES:

QUEENSLAND NURSING COUNCIL

Appellant

AND

ROLAND BARRY KARL DODD

Respondent

FILE NO/S:

Appeal 717/09

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

30 April 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

14 April 2010

JUDGE:

McGill DCJ

ORDER:

Appeal allowed, order of the Tribunal of 17 February 2009 varied by inserting in paragraph (2) an additional condition “(2.9) any application for registration, enrolment or authorisation be made at least seven years after the date of this order”, and by deleting the amount of $9,000 from paragraph (3) and substituting the amount of $13,500, and by extending the time allowed to pay to 30 April 2011.

CATCHWORDS:

INFERIOR TRIBUNALS – Nursing Tribunal – disciplinary action against nurse – appeal as to penalty – preclusion period.

Nursing Act 1992 ss 104, 116.

Facer v Bennett [2002] 2 Qd R 295 – cited.
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 – cited.
Graham v Queensland Nursing Council [2009] QCA 280 – considered.
House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499 – cited.
Medical Board of Queensland v Byrne (1958) 100 CLR 582 – cited.
Parsons v Raby [2007] QCA 98 – cited.
Queensland Nursing Council v Fletcher [2009] QCA 364 – considered.
R v Chong; ex parte Chong [2001] 2 Qd R 301 - cited.
Stevenson v Yasso [2006] 2 Qd R 150 – cited.
Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531 – cited.

COUNSEL:

K.A. McMillan SC for the appellant

The respondent did not appear

SOLICITORS:

Rodgers Barnes & Green for the appellant

The respondent was not represented

1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Queensland Nursing Tribunal on 17 February 2009 on the hearing of a charge brought by the appellant pursuant to s 104(1) of the Nursing Act 1992 (“the Act”), alleging two grounds for disciplinary action against the respondent. At the commencement of the hearing before the Tribunal, the respondent who was there represented by a solicitor admitted the two grounds and the hearing proceeded as a contested hearing as to the penalty to be imposed. The Tribunal ordered the cancellation of the respondent’s registration and set conditions under which the respondent might reapply for registration, but did not fix a period which had to elapse before the earliest point at which the respondent could successfully apply for registration, as sought by the appellant. On appeal the appellant submits that the respondent erred in failing to impose such a condition, and also challenges the quantum of the costs which the Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the appellant, as inadequate.

1. On the hearing of the appeal the respondent was not represented, although the respondent did on 26 May 2009 file an outline of argument apparently prepared by himself, which he asked the judge hearing the appeal to take into account.  I have done so.  At the end of that outline, the respondent sought orders that the decision of the Nursing Tribunal be varied…