Zepinic v Health Care Complaints Commission

The applicant, Mr Zepinic, sought leave to appeal a decision of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) which refused to order his reinstatement as a psychologist. The Health Care Complaints Commission opposed the application.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether NCAT had erred in taking into account the applicant's spent convictions when determining whether to order his reinstatement as a registered psychologist, pursuant to section 163B of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law. This raised a question of the interplay between the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law and the Criminal Records Act.

The Court of Appeal held that section 163B of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law required NCAT to consider all relevant matters when deciding whether to reinstate a health practitioner. The Court reasoned that the purpose of the National Law was to protect the public, and that spent convictions were relevant to assessing the applicant's suitability to practice. The Court found that the Criminal Records Act did not operate to prevent NCAT from considering spent convictions in this context, as the National Law provided a specific statutory scheme for the regulation of health practitioners.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.