Chaudhry v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency [2013] QCAT 305

CITATION: Chaudhry v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency [2013] QCAT 305 PARTIES: Dr Muhammad Tahir Bashir Chaudhry v Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency APPLICATION NUMBER: OCR116-13 MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Judge Alexander Horneman-Wren SC, Deputy President DELIVERED ON: 9 May 2013 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane ORDERS MADE: IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT: 1. The application for a stay is refused. THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT: 1. The matter is listed for a directions hearing at 9:30 am on 17 May 2013. CATCHWORDS: PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – LICENCES AND REGISTRATION – where the Board took immediate action under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland) and placed conditions on the registrants registration – where the registrant sought a stay of the Board’s decision – whether the stay should be granted Health Practitioner (Professional Standards) Act 1999, s 398B, s 398ZC Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland), s 156 APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any): This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act). -- 1 of 2 -- 2 REASONS FOR DECISION [1] On 15 April 2013, the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency notified Dr Muhammad Chaudhry of its decision to take immediate action in relation to him pursuant to s 156 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland) (‘National Law’). The immediate action taken was the imposition of conditions on Dr Chaudhry’s registration.1 [2] The decision to impose conditions is an appellable decision.2 The decision is thus a reviewable decision under s 398B of the Health Practitioners (Professional Standards) Act 1999. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to review the decision.3 [3] The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to grant a stay of the decision to take immediate action. Such a decision is taken under Part 8, Division 7 of the National Law. Section 398ZC of the Health Practitioners (Professional Standards) Act 1999 prohibits the granting of a stay. [4] The stay is refused. [5] Section 398ZC requires the Tribunal to finalise the review of a decision to take immediate action as quickly as possible. Dr Chaudry’s application for the review of that decision will be listed for a directions hearing on 17 May 2013. 1 See definition of immediate action in s 155(c) of the National Law. 2 Section 199 of the National Law. 3 Section 398C(1)(b) Health Practitioners (Professional Standards) Act 1999. -- 2 of 2 --