A doctor who was acquitted by the Medical Council of professional misconduct after a patient complained about him has challenged the council's proposal to place conditions, subject to court approval, on retaining his name on the medical register.
Mr Justice Kelly reserved judgement on the action by Dr Richard Casey, of Mount Merrion Avenue, Co Dublin.
In judicial review proceedings, Dr Casey claimed it was the end of the matter once the council's Fitness to Practise Committee acquitted him of misconduct. Advice from the committee had no binding effect and he believed he was free to accept or reject that advice.
The case arose from a complaint to the Medical Council by a woman who attended Dr Casey at the Well Woman Centre in Dun Laoghaire in 1996 for a cervical smear and a prescription for condoms.
In court yesterday, Mr Padraig McCartan SC, for Dr Casey, said there had been five allegations of misconduct against his client. It was alleged Dr Casey failed to show and apply standards of clinical judgement and competence required of a person in his position; failed to treat the patient with dignity and the respect due to her; failed to communicate adequately; brought the profession into disrepute and acted in a manner derogatory to the profession.
The Fitness to Practise Committee considered there was insufficient evidence to find Dr Casey guilty of professional misconduct, counsel said. But it had "strongly advised" Dr Casey to avail of continuing medical education and professional development courses in general practice.
It also advised he keep more comprehensive clinical notes and attend a course in communication skills which "could be advantageous to him in dealing with problems which arise in modern general practice".
The committee said that if in doubt, Dr Casey should consider the presence of a chaperone when dealing with patients.
The council had attached conditions to the retention of Dr Casey's name on the General Register of Medical Practitioners. These included the doctor completing a recognised course in general practice and family planning and maintaining adequate clinical records.
The conditions were subject to High Court approval.
Dr Casey had 21 days to apply to the High Court for cancellation of the decision.
Mr McCartan said that since his client had been acquitted of misconduct, he did not believe there should be conditions attached to his client's practice, which would be published on the register and would give rise to the belief that "there was no smoke without fire".
In an affidavit, Dr Casey said publication of the conditions on the register would be highly damaging to his practice as a family doctor as it clearly implied that he had either been found guilty of professional misconduct or was unfit to practise in the normal way without restriction.
Mr Kevin Feeney SC, for the Medical Council, said defects had been identified in the practice which required certain steps to be taken to protect the public.
In an affidavit, Prof George Bury, president of the Medical Council, said matters had been identified during inquiries before the Fitness to Practise Committee which made it desirable for the protection of the public interest to attach conditions to the retention of a particular medical practitioner's name on the register.