Administrative Decisions Tribunal Finds Veterinary Surgeon Guilty of Serious Misconduct and Not of Good Character |
|
On 30 September 2002 the Administrative Decisions Tribunal handed down its decision in Veterinary Surgeons Investigating Committee v Howe. The citation of the decision as to the facts is [2002] NSW ADT 191 and the decision as to Orders is No2[2003]NSWADT. The full text of the decisions will be accessible on the internet site: www.austlii.edu.au when they are published. Reading of the full text is recommended to those who wish to have accurate and complete knowledge of the proceedings against Dr. Howe. Allegations: The Veterinary Surgeons Investigating Committee referred to the Tribunal for determination allegations against Dr. Peter Allan Howe that he is guilty of misconduct, or serious misconduct, in a professional respect and that he is not of good character. The allegations arose from the certification by Dr. Howe that the semen of a ram intended for export had been tested as required by the export protocol. The Committee alleged that the Certificate was false, in that the tests certified as having been done were not in fact done, and it further alleged that Dr. Howe concocted false laboratory reports and made a false or misleading statement to the Committee. Findings: The Tribunal found that Dr. Howe signed the Certificate on 14 April 1997 when he knew that the required test had not been conducted and that he repeated false statements on at least two occasions. The Tribunal also found that Dr. Howe concocted a false laboratory report and that a consignment note produced by Dr. Howe was concocted by him for the purposes of the hearing. The Tribunal concluded that the conduct of Dr. Howe was dishonest and that it amounts to serious professional misconduct. Dr. Howe was also found to be not of good character. In its reasons for the findings the Tribunal emphasised that if the conduct of Dr. Howe had been relied upon, then it would be likely to damage the international reputation of Australia in relation to animal exports. The decision reinforces to the Veterinary Profession the responsibilities of veterinary surgeons in signing Certificates and the significance placed upon certificates signed by veterinary surgeons. Orders of the Tribunal: The Tribunal made Orders for the de-registration of Dr. Howe with a right to reapply after two years and that he pay the Committee’s costs of the proceedings. The Orders took effect on 25 June 2003. Appeals against the findings and Orders are yet to be heard. |