Following the High Court's decision in Vatsyayann v PCC  NZHC 1138, the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal has reheard and reconsidered the penalty to be imposed on a general practitioner who was found guilty of professional misconduct.
In contrast to the earlier penalty hearing where the practitioner did not appear, the practitioner provided full written and oral submissions and submitted that all issues raised by the disciplinary charges where "amenable to cure", and that with "the benefit of two years of reflection... he was now ready to resume medical practice subject to supervision and conditions". However, after "very careful evaluation of all the material" the Tribunal concluded that the practitioner's submissions had not ameliorated the severity of the conduct. The Tribunal found, among other things, that many of his explanations were not credible, that his acknowledgment of many breaches was perfunctory, and that he had a lack of insight (which was also demonstrated by previous reviews and disciplinary findings). Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that it was not satisfied that the practitioner was "amenable to cure" and that "[c]ancellation of registration is inevitable in those circumstances". Dr Vatsyayann 479/Med10/152P