Medical Board of Australia v Bhalla
[2018] QCAT 197
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Medical Board of Australia v Bhalla[2018] QCAT 197
- Add to List
Medical Board of Australia v Bhalla[2018] QCAT 197
Medical Board of Australia v Bhalla[2018] QCAT 197
QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION: | Medical Board of Australia v Bhalla [2018] QCAT 197 |
PARTIES: | MEDICAL BOARD OF AUSTRALIA (applicant) v AJAY BHALLA (respondent) |
APPLICATION NO/S: | OCR096-14 |
MATTER TYPE: | Occupational regulation matter |
DELIVERED ON: | 28 June 2018 |
HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
DECISION OF: | Justice Carmody Assisted by: Prof Errol Maguire Dr Glenda Powell Mr Brad Taylor |
ORDERS: | It is the order of the tribunal that:
“4. For the purposes of s 125(2)(b) of the National Law, Subdivision 2, Division 11, Part 7 of the National Law applies.”
|
CATCHWORDS: | PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEDURE IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS AND TRIBUNALS – OTHER MATTERS – where the tribunal imposed conditions on the practitioner’s registration after a disciplinary hearing – where the tribunal did not state whether Subdivision 2, Division 11, Part 7 of the National Law applied to the conditions – where the decision should be corrected pursuant to s 135(1)(b) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) to include an order that Subdivision 2, Division 11, Part 7 of the National Law applies Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland) (National Law) ss 125(2)(b), 196(2)(b) Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 61, 135 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld) r 90 Medical Board of Australia v Leggett [2017] QCAT 312 Medical Board of Australia v Shah (No 2) [2017] QCAT 221 Wakelin v Psychology Board of Australia [2017] QCAT 89 |
APPEARANCES: |
|
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld). | |
REASONS FOR DECISION
- [1]
- [2]The parties agree that conditions requiring Dr Bhalla to keep a register of Schedule 8 medications he prescribes and undergo audits of his practice have been fulfilled and should be removed.
- [3]The tribunal gave its decision on 21 September 2015.
- [4]A review period of 24 months or until the outcome of any other concurrent process has been considered by the Board (whichever occurs first) was imposed.[3] Dr Bhalla has applied to the Board for a review of the conditions.
- [5]The tribunal’s decision did not include an order that would permit the Board to review conditions. An order that Subdivision 2, Division 11, Part 7 of the National Law applies is required to enable the Board to review and remove registration conditions that have been imposed by the tribunal.[4]
- [6]
Extension of time
- [7]
- [8]The parties state that the requirement for further orders enabling the Board to review and remove conditions only came to either party’s attention after the conditions imposed by the tribunal had been fulfilled.
- [9]In the circumstances it is appropriate to extend the time limit for filing to the date the application for correction was filed.
Application for correction
- [10]A review of registration conditions can be conducted by either the Board or the tribunal.[8] The parties seek orders that allow the Board to conduct the review and avoid reconvening the tribunal to remove conditions which have been satisfied.
- [11]The wording of order three (3) of 21 September 2015 clearly indicates the tribunal’s intention that the Board, not the tribunal, review the conditions imposed on Dr Bhalla after the review period ended.
- [12]To give effect to that intention the decision should have also stated that Subdivision 2, Division 11, Part 7 of the National Law applies. Not including an order to this effect is an accidental omission within s 135(1)(b) QCAT Act.
- [13]The tribunal is satisfied that it is appropriate to make the orders sought by the parties:
- The time for bringing the application for correction as prescribed by rule 90 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld) be extended to the date of filing the application.
- Pursuant to s 135 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) the order of Justice Carmody of 21 September 2015 be corrected by adding a further order in the following terms:
“4. For the purposes of s 125(2)(b) of the National Law, Subdivision 2, Division 11, Part 7 of the National Law applies.”
- There be no order as to the costs of the application to extend time or the application for reopening, correction, renewal or amendment.
Footnotes
[1]QCAT Act s 135(1)(b).
[2]Pursuant to Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland) (National Law) s 196(2)(b).
[3]A review period is required by s 196(3) of the National Law.
[4]National Law s 125(2)(b).
[5]See Medical Board of Australia v Shah (No 2) [2017] QCAT 221; Medical Board of Australia v Leggett [2017] QCAT 312; Wakelin v Psychology Board of Australia [2017] QCAT 89.
[6]QCAT Rules r 90.
[7]QCAT Act s 61(1), (2).
[8]National Law s 127.