Trinh v Medical Council of New South Wales

In the proceedings before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, the applicant, Dr. Trinh, sought judicial review and leave to appeal against decisions concerning the Medical Council of New South Wales. The dispute centred on the validity of a delegation of the Council's functions, specifically its power to suspend a medical practitioner's registration, to a panel appointed by the Council's Executive Officer. Dr. Trinh contended that this delegation was an invalid subdelegation and that the Council had failed to follow the correct statutory procedures for handling complaints.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the Medical Council possessed the power to delegate its function of suspending a medical practitioner's registration, and if so, whether the specific delegation to a panel appointed by the Executive Officer was lawful. Further, the Court was required to consider the Council's statutory obligation to refer complaints to either the Health Care Complaints Commission for investigation or directly to the Medical Tribunal if grounds for suspension or deregistration were established, and how this obligation interacted with the provisions of the National Law and relevant State legislation.

The Court reasoned that while the Medical Council had the power to delegate certain functions, it did not have the power to delegate the power to delegate. However, it found that the delegation in question was not an unlawful subdelegation because the Executive Officer was not delegating a power conferred on them, but rather appointing members to a panel to exercise a function delegated to the Council. The Court also addressed the statutory scheme, interpreting the National Law and the relevant State law establishing the Health Care Complaints Commission harmoniously. It concluded that the State law, which mandated investigation by the Commission prior to referral to the disciplinary tribunal, prevailed in cases of inconsistency, and that the Council had acted in accordance with this scheme.

Consequently, the Court dismissed Dr. Trinh's summons for judicial review and her amended summons seeking leave to appeal, ordering that she pay the respondent's costs.