The National Boards refer allegations of professional misconduct to tribunals in each state and territory. Only a tribunal can cancel a practitioner’s registration, disqualify a person from applying for registration for a time, prohibit a person from using a specified title or prohibit them from providing a specified health service.

The data in this section report on the number of affected practitioners or tribunal matters. One tribunal matter can include multiple notifications about that practitioner. There may have been multiple complaints about the same or similar misconduct or multiple complaints relating to different concerns about the same practitioner that can all be included in the one tribunal referral.

There were 392 practitioners with open referral matters in tribunals at 30 June, compared with 369 practitioners last year. The National Boards referred slightly more practitioners to a tribunal, with 235 practitioners referred this year compared to 231 last year.

During the year, matters about 313 notifications (involving 187 practitioners) were closed after referral to a tribunal. Of these:

• Matters about 305 notifications (involving 180 practitioners) were decided by a tribunal.
• Matters about eight notifications were withdrawn or did not proceed to a tribunal.
  • Three of these matters did not proceed because the practitioner was deceased.
  • Five did not proceed because the Board became aware of evidentiary issues that were not apparent at the time they decided to refer; and crucial witnesses became either disengaged or unable to give evidence in the tribunal proceedings.
• 96.8% resulted in disciplinary action.

The National Boards continue to appropriately identify the thresholds for referring a matter to a tribunal to protect the public.

Tribunal decisions

Matters included findings of professional misconduct involving:

• family violence offending and other serious criminal offending including murder and serious sexual offending
• sexual boundary breaches and other general boundary breaches, such as inappropriate relationships with patients
• sexual harassment of colleagues and patients
• failing to obtain informed consent for intimate examinations
• failing to comply with public health directions relating to COVID-19
• misappropriating medications, falsifying scripts and inappropriate and/or improper prescribing and dispensing
• inappropriate commentary on social media including commentary that was disparaging of colleagues, denigrating certain groups in society and contrary to best scientific evidence on certain medical issues
• inadequate clinical management and/or medical mismanagement and/or providing treatment that was not clinically justified or evidence based.

Significant periods of disqualification were imposed in some matters, including in matters involving:

• the murder of two people (convictions) (40 years)
• access to and possession of child exploitation material (convictions) (10 years)
• personal and sexual relationship with patient, inappropriate billing in respect of that patient (billing for consults when they were engaging in intimate/sexual activity) and threatening behaviour towards same patient (6 years)
• inappropriate clinical treatment and/or management of patients including inappropriate prescribing and prescribing of schedule 8 medications without a permit (6 years from time practitioner surrendered registration).

We include links to published adverse tribunal (disciplinary) decisions and court outcomes in the Register of practitioners, unless the name of the practitioner has been suppressed by the court or tribunal.

When a court or tribunal cancels a practitioner’s registration or disqualifies them from applying for registration, using a specified title or providing a specified health service, this is recorded in the Register of cancelled practitioners.

When a tribunal reprimands, suspends or places conditions on the registration of a practitioner, this is recorded in the Register of practitioners.

Published summaries

We published 100 summaries about publicly available court or tribunal decisions. Some decisions are not published for privacy reasons or due to suppression orders applied by the court or tribunal. Other decisions may not be released by the court or tribunal until the next reporting year.

Panels are established by the Boards and include members from the community and the relevant health profession. Health panels must include a medical practitioner.

Matters involving six practitioners (relating to eight notifications) were decided by panels, resulting in regulatory action against five practitioners.

There were 111 appeals lodged about decisions made by the National Boards (see Table 28).

• This was lower than in 2022/23, when there were 121 lodged.
• The majority were from professions that have a higher number of regulatory decisions, such as medical practitioners (65) and nurses (19).
• 113 were finalised.
• 69 were not yet decided at 30 June.

One way we ensure access to safe, professional healthcare is to investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute people alleged to have committed criminal offences under the National Law.

These offences include:

• unlawful use of protected titles
• unlawful claims that a person is a health practitioner
• performing a restricted act
• unlawful advertising.

Only registered practitioners can use protected titles for their profession. It is also an offence to falsely claim to be qualified to practise in a health profession or hold yourself, or someone else, out as a registered health practitioner. Penalties of up to three years’ imprisonment and/or a $60,000 fine can be imposed on individuals who commit these offences, and a fine of up to $120,000 for companies.

During the year:

• 547 criminal offence complaints were received, a 23.8% increase on the number of complaints received last year (see Table 30).
  • 69.7% related to alleged unlawful use of title and unlawful claims to registration.
• 433 criminal offence complaints were considered and closed.
• 294 open criminal offence complaints were still under review at 30 June.
• 140 new complaints about advertising were considered – most related to the advertising of corporate entities or unregistered persons, a 45.8% increase on the number of matters considered last year.
• 88 advertising complaints were closed.

Criminal prosecutions

Ahpra successfully prosecuted a number of people found to have committed criminal offences (see Table 31), including:

• ‘fake’ practitioners with no relevant formal qualifications, who held themselves out to patients and employers as registered practitioners
• practitioners who continued to practise after their registration was suspended by tribunals or a National Board
• practitioners who continued to practise after surrendering their registration
• practitioners who continued to practise after they failed to renew their registration, even after they realised they were not registered. 

Significant prosecutions demonstrate the importance of criminal offence provisions for the protection of the public.

Outcomes show that Ahpra continues to identify appropriate thresholds for referring offence complaints for prosecution.

• 14 proceedings were completed in the courts for offences.
  • 13 prosecutions resulted in a finding of guilt against the defendant.
  • In one case the defendant left Australia before entering a plea and, while they are not expected to return, a warrant for their arrest has been issued by the court.
• 12 prosecutions were ongoing at 30 June.

Fake nurse jailed in landmark outcome

The first custodial sentence under the National Law was imposed in September, after a woman was convicted for the second time for falsely claiming to be a registered nurse. She was sentenced to four months and 28 days imprisonment, to be suspended after serving one month.

This is the most serious sentence ever imposed under the National Law.