PHARMACY BOARD OF AUSTRALIA and DZIUBAK [2018] VR 88

STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
[2018] VR 88
30/08/2018
Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (WA) Act 2010 - Schedule s193(1)(a)(i)Referral
VR 88/2018
30/08/2018
MS C WALLACE, SENIOR MEMBER
30/08/2018
Perth
PHARMACY BOARD OF AUSTRALIA
OLIVER DZIUBAK

 

On the application of the parties to settle the proceedings determined by Senior Member Charlotte Wallace:

 

The Tribunal notes:

 

The Pharmacy Board of Australia (Applicant) alleged that there is proper cause for disciplinary action against Mr Oliver Dziubak (Respondent) pursuant to s 196 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (National Law) because the Respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct as defined in s 5 of the National Law.

 

The Respondent has admitted that he has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct contrary to the National Law and the parties have agreed the terms upon which the proceedings could be settled pursuant to s 54(8) of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004(WA).

 

The Parties have agreed the relevant facts set out in Schedule 'A'.

 

THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS:

 

Being satisfied by reason of the Respondent's admissions that proper cause exists for disciplinary action against the Respondent, and in order to give effect to the agreed terms of settlement of the proceeding, on 30 August 2018 it is ordered, pursuant to s 54(8) of the State  Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA) that:

 

1.     The Respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct in terms of s196(1)(b)(iii) of the National Law, in that:

 

(a)     on 7 September 2017, he was convicted of selling a prohibited drug (testosterone) contrary to s 6(1)(c) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA) (Offence);

 

(b)     he failed to notify the Applicant that he had been charged with the Offence within 7 days of becoming aware of being charged, contrary to s 130(1) of the National Law; and

 

(c)     he failed to comply with:

(i)     conduct statement 1.1 of the Applicant's Code of Conduct for Pharmacists (March 2014) (Code of Conduct), in that he failed to act in accordance with the law;

(ii)     conduct statement 1.2 of the Code of Conduct, which required him to protect and promote the health of individuals and the community;

(iii)     conduct statement 8.1 of the Code of Conduct, in that he has failed to display a standard of behaviour that warrants the trust and respect of the community;

(iv)     principle 3 of the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia's Code of Ethics (in force between September 2011 and January 2017) (PSA Code of Ethics), in that he failed to uphold the reputation of, and public trust in, the pharmacy profession; and

(v)     principle 4 of the PSA Code of Ethics, in that he failed to:

 

     A.  ensure the responsible and accountable control and supply of therapeutic goods; and

 

     B.  contribute to public health.

 

2.     Pursuant to s 196(2)(a) of the National Law, the Respondent is reprimanded.

 

3.     The Respondent pay a contribution towards the Applicant's costs of the Tribunal application, fixed in the sum of $3,000.

Back to List