Cuban doctor losses legal fight against Medical Council

Licence denial

…Civil Procedure Rules 2016  final – CCJ

The Caribbean Court of Justice on Friday ruled that the Crown Office Rules of 1906 were no longer applicable and that Guyana’s Civil Procedure Rules 2016 applied to all civil proceedings, in light of a challenge against the Guyana Medical Council by Cuban doctor, Jose Ocampo Trueba.
In September 2017, Dr Trueba filed an application in the High Court seeking judicial review of the Medical Council’s refusal to grant his application for full registration as a medical practitioner. He told the court that he was unaware on what grounds his application was refused before he was given the chance to be

heard.
Since 2013, Dr Trueba was granted an institutional registration, which meant that he was licensed to practice only at the Davis Memorial Hospital, but according to the Medical Council, he was in breach of his licence since he was operating privately as well at other institutions. In July 2017, he applied for full registration as a medical practitioner.
He was written to twice by the Council asking whether he would like to respond to the letters but he never acknowledged them, which ultimately resulted in the Medical Council’s decision not to grant him his licence.
The Medical Council also published an advertisement in two newspapers notifying the public that Dr Trueba was licensed to practice medicine only at the Davis Memorial Hospital. However, Dr Trueba challenged the decision in the High Court in September asking for a judicial review of the Council’s decision and that the court set aside the Council’s decision based on the procedures in the Crown Office Rules 1906. In her ruling, acting Chief Justice Roxane George dismissed the application on the basis that judicial review was not an appropriate recourse as Section 19 of the Medical Practitioners Act stated that persons who wanted to challenge a decision of the Council should appeal to a High Court Judge in chambers.
Not satisfied with the ruling, Trueba sought redress from the Appeal Court, which ordered that the matter be remitted to the High Court because the Judge should not have automatically refused the application but should have considered whether judicial review was appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
The Medical Council then applied to the CCJ for special leave to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision.
However, the CCJ agreed with the Court of Appeal that the right to appeal to a Judge in chambers did not totally preclude an application for judicial review but said that as a rule of thumb, the safe route to challenge a decision of the Medical Council of Guyana was to appeal to a Judge in chambers. Nevertheless, the CCJ allowed the appeal and upheld the decision of the Acting Chief Justice.
The court said that the implication of its decision was that pending, and especially unheard, applications, brought or proceeding otherwise than in accordance with the new rules will now need to be revisited by the courts.
The court also noted that it was “highly improper” for Trueba to conceal from the High Court Judge the fact that he had been operating in breach of his licence and that it was dishonest of him to have falsely stated that he was never the subject of disciplinary proceedings and unaware of any reasons why the Medical Council could have refused his application.
The court said this was in breach of his duty to make a full and frank disclosure.
In the reasons for the court’s decision, the CCJ commended the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the attorneys for the parties for the speedy resolution of the matter, which took less than six months from start to finish.