Practitioner update · NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal
On 21 July 2021 the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal found general practitioner Dr Ashraf Sakla guilty of professional misconduct for having a personal and romantic relationship with a vulnerable patient. It suspended his registration for six months, reprimanded him and imposed conditions on his return to practice, in Health Care Complaints Commission v Sakla [2021] NSWCATOD 97.
- Decision
- HCCC v Sakla [2021] NSWCATOD 97
- Tribunal
- NCAT, Occupational Division
- Decision date
- 21 July 2021
- Outcome
- Six-month suspension, reprimand, conditions
What the complaint concerned
The Health Care Complaints Commission brought complaints of unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct about Dr Sakla’s dealings with a female patient of his general practice in 2017. He was also the treating GP for her husband and children. The parties agreed a statement of facts shortly before the hearing.
The agreed facts
According to the agreed facts set out in the decision, between March and August 2017 Dr Sakla:
- after a consultation in which the patient disclosed she was experiencing abuse at home, kept clinical notes that were inadequate and would not have allowed another doctor to take over her care;
- called her about 85 times, gave her his mobile number and sent her personal text messages, including photos of himself;
- engaged in a personal and romantic relationship with her, including meeting her outside the practice, hugging and kissing, and meeting her at a motel on two occasions;
- made inappropriate personal disclosures to her about his marriage, family and social life; and
- gave her money, including to buy perfume and jewellery.
Dr Sakla accepted that the patient was vulnerable, that he had crossed sexual boundaries, and that his conduct was significantly below the expected standard and unethical.
The Tribunal's findings
The Tribunal accepted the evidence of the Commission’s expert and found that Dr Sakla’s conduct amounted to professional misconduct. It found that he had consciously disregarded his professional and ethical obligations not to form a personal relationship with a vulnerable patient, at a time when he was still treating her family.
The Tribunal also noted that at the time he was seeing up to 60 patients a day, and that he had conceded he was not fully aware of the Medical Board’s code of conduct and sexual boundaries guidelines.
In his favour, the Tribunal accepted that he had been frank, forthcoming and remorseful, had made early admissions, and had sought professional help. It found cause for optimism that he would not repeat the conduct, but said there remained a need for general deterrence. It described his retraining efforts to date as highly inadequate.
Orders
The Tribunal ordered that:
- Dr Sakla’s registration is suspended for six months from the date of the decision.
- He is reprimanded.
- After his suspension, his registration is subject to conditions, including that he practise only in an approved group practice that includes a doctor with at least seven years’ post-registration experience and always has another doctor or staff member on site, see no more than 40 patients a day, undergo a performance assessment and an audit of his records, and be mentored monthly for at least 12 months.
- The Medical Council of NSW may alter, vary or remove the conditions.
The Tribunal indicated a preliminary view that Dr Sakla should pay the Commission’s costs.
Source: Health Care Complaints Commission v Sakla [2021] NSWCATOD 97, AustLII, accessed 21 October 2026.
