Kamal v Medical Council of New Zealand  NZDC 14237
Published 17 May 2019
Medical disciplinary appeal — inappropriate touching — voluntary undertaking — Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003, ss 69, 106, 109 — Austin Nichols and Co v Stichting Lodestar  2 NZLR 141.
The appellant appealed a decision of The Medical Council of New Zealand that placed the condition that all the appellant's consultations with female patients required a chaperone. The allegation was that the appellant had inappropriately touched the breast of a female patient in a consultation about a sore shoulder.
The appellant had the support of his colleagues and a report produced by the medical centre's director. Further, the complainant made a complaint to the Police, which did not result in charges. The Judge also noted that as a result the complainant has not been required to give her statement under oath or have it challenged in cross-examination.
The Judge held that the condition placed on the appellant was not fair, reasonable or proportionate to the complaint. The Judge modified the voluntary undertaking to be that a chaperone must be present for:
(a) all consultations with patients under the age of 16 who are unaccompanied by a parent;
(b) all breast, rectal and pelvic examinations on female patients; and
(c) as requested by the patient or another health professional.
The appellant was also awarded costs and name suppression.
Judgment Date: 18 July 2018.
* * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *