Raynor v Health Ombudsman

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Raynor v Health Ombudsman [2019] QCAT 139

PARTIES:

BRANDON RAYNOR 
(applicant)

v

HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCRO67-18

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

4 June 2019

HEARING DATE:

3 April 2019

HEARD AT:

Brisbane  

DECISION OF:

Judge Allen QC, Deputy President  

ORDERS:

1.   The decision of the Health Ombudsman on 26 October 2017 to issue an interim prohibition order is confirmed, except to the extent that the interim prohibition order is amended as follows.

2.   The interim prohibition order is amended in terms of annexure A.

3.   The respondent is to file submissions on costs by 4.00pm on 11 June 2019.

4.    The applicant is to file submissions on costs by 4.00pm on 18 June 2019.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – OTHER HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – where the applicant is an unregistered health practitioner – where the applicant provides health services including massage therapy – where the Health Ombudsman alleges that the applicant has performed manipulation of the cervical spine in contravention of section 123 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law – where the Health Ombudsman took immediate action by issuing an interim prohibition order under s 68 of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) – where the interim prohibition order restricted the applicant’s provision of health services by prohibiting the applicant from providing, or promoting, a health service involving manipulation of the cervical spine and from providing any training, demonstration, education or instruction on manipulation of the cervical spine and from publishing or making available any documents demonstrating manipulation of the cervical spine – where the applicant applied for review of the interim prohibition order – whether the interim prohibition order is necessary to protect public health or safety

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

Self-represented

Respondent:

C Templeton instructed by the Office of the Health Ombudsman

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

1. The applicant is the owner and operator of Brandon Raynor’s School of Natural Therapies. He provides massage services and training in massage services, including in Queensland. The applicant is not a registered health practitioner but is a “health service provider” within the meaning of s 8 of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (“HO Act”). The applicant is not registered in the chiropractic, osteopathy, medical or physiotherapy health professions.

2. The applicant advertised services and massage courses on his website He also published videos on a YouTube channel called “Brandon Raynor’s School of Natural Therapies”. This channel contained a series of videos showing the applicant massaging persons. During the course of an investigation conducted by the Office of the Health Ombudsman (“OHO”), an investigator made recordings of 14 videos posted on the channel (“the YouTube videos”). The YouTube videos are in evidence before the Tribunal. The Health Ombudsman alleges that the YouTube videos show the applicant performing manipulations of the cervical spine of persons in apparent breach of s 123 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (“National Law”) which provides as follows:

   123 Restriction on spinal…