The High Court has refused to quash a decision of the secretary-manager of a Dublin hospital to refer complaints against a consultant anaesthetist to the Minister for Health and Children with a request that he appoint a committee to inquire into the matter.
Dr Celine Traynor, a consultant anaesthetist at the Coombe Women's Hospital, had taken proceedings against Mr John Ryan, secretary-manager of the hospital, seeking a series of declarations in relation to his handling of a number of complaints against her.
In his reserved judgment yesterday, Mr Justice McCracken said that pursuant to a disciplinary procedure and by letter of June 2001, Dr Traynor was informed of concerns arising from five written complaints from some of her colleagues and a sixth verbal complaint which was later made in writing. The judge said he emphasised, and it was fully accepted by Dr Traynor, that her proceedings were not an appeal from the findings of Mr Ryan but were concerned only with the procedures which were followed.
In those circumstances, the judge said he would not comment on the decisions in the individual cases any more than was necessary.
While reports from Dr Traynor's colleagues may not have constituted formal complaints, there was no doubt the doctors were complaining in the ordinary sense of the word about her behaviour.
The disciplinary procedures did not envisage a mandatory formal complaints procedure, he said.
He had no doubt there were sufficient matters of concern to justify the commencement of the disciplinary procedures in each case.
The judge said it was relevant that the procedures followed by Mr Ryan were those set out in what was commonly known as the consultants' common contract. At the start of her employment, Dr Traynor had therefore accepted these to be proper procedures in disciplinary matters.
The judge said he believed the procedures followed were absolutely fair in relation to a preliminary hearing of this nature. He noted Mr Ryan was not making a final judgment as to whether there was misconduct on the part of Dr Traynor but was only determining whether her conduct should be considered by a committee.
Mr Justice McCracken said he was satisfied that fair procedures were followed. He dismissed the claim and allowed costs against Dr Traynor but granted a stay on his order in the event of an appeal.
The judge said he thought it necessary to quote some remarks made in reports from Dr Traynor's colleagues. An assistant master, Dr Galimberti, had ended her report by saying she found Dr Traynor's manner very aggressive.
Dr Michael Carey had written to the master of the hospital stating he had received a phone call from Dr Traynor who basically objected to his coming in on her night on call. He had written that the tone of the conversation was one of unprecedented personal abuse directed towards him.