NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Gorman v Medical Board of NSW [2009] NSWSC 1099
HEARING DATE(S) : 12 October 2009
JUDGMENT DATE : 22 October 2009
JUDGMENT OF : R A Hulme J
DECISION : The proceedings are dismissed. The first and second plaintiffs are to pay the defendant's costs as agreed or assessed.
CATCHWORDS : PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - motion to dismiss proceedings - no reasonable cause of action disclosed - declaratory relief sought - suspended medical practitioner seeking advisory opinion
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 LEGISLATION CITED : Medical Practice Act 1992 Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) Public Health Act 1991
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Australia Institute of Private Detectives Ltd v Privacy Commissioner (2004) 139 FCR 394 Bass v Permanent Trustee Co Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 334 Challenge Bank Ltd v Mailman (Court of Appeal 14 May 1993, unreported) CASES CITED : General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) 1964 112 CLR 125 Hunter and New England Area Health Service v A [2009] NSWSC 761 Oil Basins Ltd v The Commonwealth [1993] HCA 60; (1993) 178 CLR 643 Penthouse Publications Limited v McWilliam (Court of Appeal 14 March 1991, unreported)
Dr Richard Francis GORMAN (First plaintiff) PARTIES : Buck (Raymond) PAENGA (Second plaintiff) Medical Board of New South Wales (Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 30057/09
COUNSEL : First plaintiff (in person) Defendant (Mr I Bourke of counsel)
SOLICITORS : First plaintiff in person Crown Solicitor's Office
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate