Pharmacist loses defamation case

THE Federal Court of Australia has ruled against a WA pharmacist who claimed he was defamed by conditions being imposed on his registration and subsequent publication by the Pharmacy Board of Australia & the Australian Health Practioner Regulatory Agency.

The case related to a 2011 audit of his pharmacy by the WA Department of Health, which resulted in a range of allegations related to record keeping and storage of S8 medicines.

He pleaded not guilty to charges in 2013, but lost the case with penal es of over $12,000 imposed.

A subsequent AHPRA inves ga on saw condi ons imposed on his registra on, including one which stated he was “prohibited from taking or self‐administering Schedule 8 drugs save for those legally prescribed for him”.

The pharmacist said the wording and publica on by the Pharmacy Board of this condi on was “particularly provocative and insensitive”, and commenced proceedings in 2014 against the Board and AHPRA seeking removal of the condi ons along with damages for “defamation” and “injurious falsehood”.

In 2015 the Board voluntarily removed the offending condition and it was removed from the AHPRA website, however the proceedings con nued with a final judgement delivered this week.

The judge found that while AHPRA and the Pharmacy Board accepted that the pharmacist had never self‐ administered or in any other way abused S8 drugs, they were able to publish the condi on on the basis of “absolute privilege” because the proceedings against the pharmacist were “quasi‐judicial”.