Health Care Complaints Commission v Knowles [2020] NSWCATOD 80

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Health Care Complaints Commission v Knowles [2020] NSWCATOD 80 Hearing dates: 2, 3, 4, & 5 March 2020 Date of orders: 20 July 2020 Decision date: 20 July 2020 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: Le Poer Trench ADCJ, Principal Member Dr J Fogarty, Senior Member Dr G Abouyanni, Senior Member Dr C Berglund, General Member Decision: (1) The Registration of Phillip James Knowles is suspended until Friday 16 April 2021. (2) Order 1 of these orders is stayed for 21 days from the publication of these reasons and orders. (3) On the expiration of the practitioner's suspension the following conditions are imposed on the practitioner's registration: (a) to practise only in a group practice, of not less than two other registered medical practitioners AND where (i) the patients and patient records are shared between the medical practitioners. (ii) there is always at least one other registered medical practitioner on site. (b) advise the Medical Council of NSW ("the Council") in writing not less than seven days prior to changing the nature or place of his practice; (c) not to possess, supply, administer or prescribe any "drug of addiction" (Schedule 8 drug) as defined in the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW) and any substance listed in Schedule 4 Appendix D of the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation 2009 (NSW); (d) not to make any application to review his prescribing restrictions with the NSW Health Pharmaceutical Regulatory Unit without the approval of the Medical Council of NSW; (e) to submit to the supervision by another medical practitioner as appointed by the Medical Council of NSW. If possible, one of the practitioner's supervisors is to be a medical practitioner who has access to the medical records of the practitioner in the practice in which he is engaged. (f) to practise under Category B supervision in accordance with the Council's Compliance Policy-Supervision (as varied from time to time) and as subsequently determined by the appropriate review body: (i) at each supervision meeting the practitioner is to submit to a review and discussion of his practice with his approved supervisor with particular focus on appropriate prescribing practices and compliance with legislative requirements, as well as record keeping; (ii) to authorise the Council to provide proposed and approved supervisor/s with a copy of these reasons for decision. (g) To practise no more than 35 hours a week and no more than 5 days per week. (h) to treat or see in consultation no more than 35 patients in any one day except in the case of emergency; (i) not to prescribe for self-medication. (j) to have all care plans, team care plans, mental health care plans, Level C and Level D billings reviewed each month by his supervisor to assess their compliance with Medicare criteria for these claims. Supervisor reports are to include a comment on this compliance with each report to Council. (k) to submit to a Practice based Performance Assessment of his medical practice by a person or persons nominated by the Council. The Performance Assessment is to be held within six months from the date of expiration of the suspension imposed by Order 1 of these orders; (i) to meet all costs associated with the Performance Assessment and any subsequent reports; (ii) to authorise and consent to any exchange of information between the Council, Medicare Australia and the Pharmaceutical Regulatory Unit for the purpose of monitoring compliance with these conditions; (iii) within seven days of commencing any other employment the practitioner is to forward evidence to the Council that he has provided a copy of these conditions to the principal of that place of practice; and (iv) to authorise the Council to exchange information with any future persons or organisations at places where he works as a medical practitioner in Australia, regarding any issues arising in relation to compliance with these conditions. (4) While the practitioner's principal place of practice is New South Wales, the Medical Council of NSW is the appropriate review body for the purposes of Part 8, Division 8 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) (the National Law). (5) If the practitioner's principal place of practice is anywhere in Australia other than in New South Wales, ss 125 to 127 of the National Law are to apply, and a review of these conditions can be conducted by the Medical Board of Australia. (6) The Registrar is requested to advise the Medical Council of NSW as soon as practicable of Orders 1, 2 and 3 of these orders. (7) The parties are to confer in relation to the Health Care Complaints Commission's application for costs and if an agreement is reached a minute of an agreed order is to be forwarded to the Registrar for referral to the Tribunal. In the event of no agreement as to costs being reached within 21 days from the date of this order, either party may apply for any cost order sought, provided any such application is made, in writing, to the Registrar and to the other party, on or before 28 August 2020, supported by a written submission. (8) Should a cost application be made pursuant to Order 7 hereof, then any response to same which is sought to be relied upon is to be provided to the Registrar and the other party, within 14 days of receipt of the application. Catchwords: PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – health and professionals – medical practitioners – disciplinary proceedings – provision of medical service without patient consent – making non-contemporaneous medical notes – inappropriate prescription of Schedule 8 and Schedule 4 drugs Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW) Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation 2009 (NSW) Cases Cited: Chen v Health Care Complaints Commission [2017] NSWCA 186 Clyne v New South Wales Bar Association (196) 104 CLR 186 Dawson v Law Society of New South Wales [1989] NSWCA 58 Director-General, Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care v Lambert (2009) NSWLR 523 Gayed v Walton [1997] NSWSC 279 HCCC v Gillett [2007] NSWNMT 7 HCCC v Phung (No. 1) [2012] 1 NSWDT HCCC v Rutner [2009] NSWD 2 Health Care Complaints Commission v Bainbridge [2018] NSWCATOD 169 Health Care Complaints Commission v Do [2014] NSWCA 307 Health Care Complaints Commission v Dr Maendel [2013] NSWMT 3 Health Care Complaints Commission v Dr Platt [2013] NSWMT 14 Health Care Complaints Commission v Elliott [2017] NSWCATOD 20 Health Care Complaints Commission v Fraser [2014] NSWCATOD 29 Health Care Complaints Commission v Howe [2010] NSWMT 12 Health Care Complaints Commission v Litchfield (1997) 41 NSWLR 630 Health Care Complaints Commission v Little [2016] NSWCATOD 146 Health Care Complaints Commission v Liu [2016] NSWCATOD 133 Health Care Complaints Commission v MacGregor [2016] NSWCATOD 86 Health Care Complaints Commission v Sare [2018] NSWCATOD 190 Health Care Complaints Commission v Sultan [2018] NSWCA 303 Health Care Complaints Commission v Vega [2015] NSWCATOD 62 Lee v Health Care Complaints Commission [2012] NSWCA 80 Mahoney JA in Law Society of NSW v Foreman (1994) 34 NSWLR 408 New South Wales Bar Association v Evatt (1968) 117 CLR 117 NSW Bar Association v Meakes [2006] NSWCA 340 Office of Local Government v Toma [2016] NSWCATOD 21 Prakash v Health Care Complaints Commission [2006] NSWCA 153 R v Byrne (1995) 193 CLR 501 Sabag v Health Care Complaints Commission [2001] NSWCA 411 Slezak, Dr Peter [2011] NSWMPSC 10 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Health Care Complaints Commission (Applicant) Phillip James Knowles (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P Aitken (Applicant) S Barnes (Respondent)