Professional Misconduct

Sarkis Douaihy

Address: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Sex: Male
Occupation: Doctor
Date: 10 May 2004


Dr Sarkis Douaihy was reprimanded on 10 May 2004 by a Medical Tribunal.

In accordance with s 51 (1) of the Medical Practice Act 1992 (“the Act”) the Health Care Complaints Commission (“the Commission”) made a complaint to the New South Wales Medical Tribunal (the Tribunal) against Dr Sarkis Douaihy. The complaint is that being a medical practitioner registered under the Act he is guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct and/or professional misconduct within the meaning of ss 36 and 37 of the Act.

As to the first part of the complaint it is said that:

(i)            he demonstrated a lack of adequate knowledge, skill, judgment or care in the practice of medicine;

(ii)           he has engaged in improper or unethical conduct relating to the practice of medicine;

(iii)          he has been convicted of offences under s 128 B of the Health Insurance Act 1973 of the Commonwealth.

Particulars of the complaint were that between 2 November 1997 and 31 January 1998 he made false and/or misleading claims on the Health Insurance Commission on twelve occasions thereby falsely obtaining $450.15 from the Health Insurance Commission; and on 14 December 1999 was convicted of twelve offences under s 128 B of the Health Insurance Act 1973.

As to the second part of the complaint it is said that on 14 December 1999 he was convicted in the Local Court on each of twelve offences against s 128 B Health Insurance Act 1973. Particulars were set out in a certificate of conviction. The certificate of conviction showed that Dr Douaihy on 14 December 1999 was convicted at the Local Court, level 4, Downing Centre, the offences having occurred on 2, 6, 7, 23 November 1997, 2, 16, 19 December 1997 and 1, 11, 20, 16 and 31 January 1998 at Sydney. Each offence involved the making of a statement which was false or misleading in a material particular. The penalty was a recognisance under s 20 (1)(a) of the Crimes Act, Commonwealth, to be of good behaviour for two years, self-surety $1,000.00, with an order to pay court costs of $52.00.

The orders made by the Tribunal were;

1. The respondent is reprimanded;

2. The respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs.