Medical Board of Australia - Tribunal reprimands medical practitioner for inappropriately providing medical certificate and prescription
Look up a health practitioner

Close

Check if your health practitioner is qualified, registered and their current registration status

Tribunal reprimands medical practitioner for inappropriately providing medical certificate and prescription

29 Jun 2017

A tribunal has found that Dr Mark Denis Kelly, a medical practitioner engaged in unprofessional conduct by inappropriately providing a person with a medical certificate and prescription.

The Medical Board of Australia (the Board) referred Dr Kelly to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the tribunal) on 31 July 2015 after considering allegations they had received that Dr Kelly had inappropriately provided a medical certificate and prescription for Diazepam to patient, NT.

During the hearing, on 9 February 2016, the tribunal heard circumstances relating to Dr Kelly’s alleged conduct including that:

  • Dr Kelly did not maintain a professional or treating relationship with NT
  • NT was not a patient of the Unit in which Dr Kelly worked and
  • Dr Kelly was told by person NT that the medical certificate was required for the purpose of excusing them from attendance at a parole or probation reporting appointment.

The practitioner admitted the allegations against him, accepted that he had breached the former Medical Board of Queensland’s Code of Conduct and that his conduct amounted to unprofessional conduct.

The tribunal accepted the admissions made by Dr Kelly and took into account his belief that he was under duress to provide the medical certificate and the prescription. The tribunal also noted the early admissions made by Dr Kelly and his co‐operation during the disciplinary proceedings.

The tribunal found that despite the circumstances surrounding the matter, there was no doubt that Dr Kelly’s conduct amounted to unprofessional conduct.

The tribunal reprimanded1 Dr Kelly and required him to pay the Board’s costs.

The tribunal emphasised that a reprimand should not be considered a trivial sanction as it will be recorded on the public Register of Practitioners.

The decision is published on the tribunal's website.


1 At the time this tribunal summary was published the reprimand had been lifted.

 
 
Page reviewed 29/06/2017