Bernadt v Medical Board of Australia

[2013] WASCA 259

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Health practitioner regulation
3. › Immediate action by National Board
4. › Suspension of registration under s 156
5. › Whether power of immediate action interlocutory in nature
6. › Whether failure to take further action under s 158 invalidates immediate action
7. › Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (WA), ss 155-159
1. Administrative Law
2. › Health practitioner regulation
3. › Immediate action by National Board
4. › Reasonable belief that practitioner poses serious risk to persons
5. › Sufficiency of evidence
6. › Standard of review on appeal
7. › Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (WA), s 156(1)(a)
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Mandatory and directory provisions
3. › Effect of non-compliance with statutory requirements
4. › Whether failure to comply with notice requirements invalidates substantive decision
5. › Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (WA), s 158(2)(c)
1. Appeal
2. › Review of findings of fact
3. › State Administrative Tribunal hearing de novo
4. › Appellate review of factual findings
5. › Whether findings supported by evidence

Quick Take

The Board's power to take immediate action under s 156 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law is not interlocutory — it takes effect for the period specified in s 159(2) and is not required to be expressed as having effect only until the determination of further action. The Board's failure to take further action under s 158(1)(b) or to specify proposed further action in the notice under s 158(2)(c) does not invalidate the decision to take immediate action. The question whether there are circumstances in which the Board could properly consider that no further action under Part 8 is appropriate after taking immediate action was left open.