EDELSTEN v RICHMOND [1988] NSWCA 43

EDELSTEN v RICHMOND

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

CLARKE, HOPE and SAMUELS JJA 26,27 and 28 September 1988, 11 November 1988

[1988] NSWCA 43

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS ACT 1938-1987 - INDUCEMENT — ATTEMPT — HEALTH INSURANCE (VARIATION OF FEES IN MEDICAL SERVICES) REGULATIONS — RENDERING OF MEDICAL SERVICES — PERSONAL SUPERVISION — ASSISTANCE The Medical Tribunal constituted under the Medical Practitioners Act 1938 found that seven complaints which had been made against the appellant had been made out. The first complaint which was established was that the appellant was not of good character. In this respect it was alleged that the appellant had a conversation with a person whom he knew to be a criminal and a murderer with a view to obtaining his assistance to intimidate a former patient. The other complaints, which asserted that the appellant had been guilty of conduct in a professional respect, were conveniently grouped into three categories.

The first category, constituted by complaints (2) and (3), broadly alleged that he induced, or attempted to induce medical practitioners who worked for him, or for companies associated with him, to overservice their patients. The second (complaint 4) that he joined in an improper fee sharing arrangement with other medical practitioners.

The third category (complaints 5, 6 and 7) related to the delegation by him to a registered nurse of the responsibility for carrying out tattoo removal by laser surgery.

The appellant contended that all the findings against him were vitiated by the application of an improper standard of proof and in addition he asserted specific errors in respect of the individual findings. The respondent argued that all, or at least most, of the submissions involved suggested errors of fact which were not appellable under the Medical Practitioners Act.