Australia, June 2 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on May 2:

1. This is an appeal by Dr Frank Simon Winter (the Practitioner) under s 159(1)(a) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) (the National Law) against a suspension made at the second s 150 hearing on 20 March 2024 (the second s 150 hearing). The Medical Council of NSW (the Medical Council) seeks the appeal be dismissed.

2. The purpose of this hearing is limited to considering whether, under s 150 of the National Law, we are satisfied that it is appropriate for the protection of the health or safety of any person or persons or if it is otherwise in the public interest to continue the suspension of the Practitioner's registration.

3. At this hearing, we stand in the shoes of the delegates at the second s 150 hearing. Section 159(3) provides the appeal is to be dealt with by way of a new hearing and that fresh evidence or evidence in addition to or in substitution of the evidence that was before the delegates in March 2024 may be given.

4. This is a risk assessment. We are looking at the potential for harm. We need to turn our minds to the nature and extent of the risk and consider whether that risk is unacceptable. The essential question is whether allowing the Practitioner to practise, or to practise with certain conditions, involves an unacceptable risk to the health and safety of the public, or otherwise involves an unacceptable risk to the public interest (Ghosh v Medical Council of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 122 at [103]). We do not need to reach any conclusive findings of fact. Nor do we involve ourselves in any final determination of the merits of the claims that are made against the Practitioner.

The evidence

5. The Practitioner provided evidence from Dr Keng, Dr Singh and Dr Venkateswaran.

6. The Respondent's primary evidence is contained in two volumes, consisting of 559 pages and a further volume of supplementary evidence.

7. Oral evidence was given at the hearing by Dr Winter, Dr Keng, Dr Venkateswaran, Associate Professor Wijeratne and Dr Metcalf.

What has the Heath Care Complaints Commission done in the last year?

8. When the Council suspended the Practitioner's registration on 20 March 2024, they also referred the matter to the Health Care Complaints Commission (the Commission) for investigation.

9. Counsel for the Medical Council was unable to offer any explanation as to why it has taken almost a year for the Commission to complete an investigation given that the substance of the complaint against the Practitioner has not materially changed in that period.

10. It took until 5 March 2025, for the Commission to write to the Practitioner advising him that the Commission was at its end of its investigations concerning the complaints against him and informing him that the evidence indicated that:

* He may be suffering from an impairment as defined under the National Law

* He engaged in improper and/or unethical conduct in the practice of medicine as defined under the National Law

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19685290081532e9ad449cf1)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.