Latest news with #NCAT
News.com.au
2 days ago
- Health
- News.com.au
‘Best orgasm of your life': NSW doctor massaged patient, ‘tweaked' nipples, made sexual comments
A NSW doctor inappropriately massaged a patient, groped her breasts and 'tweaked' her nipples, and made sexualised comments including that he could give her 'the best orgasm of your life' before buying her an Aldi bag of groceries to say sorry, a tribunal has found. Dr Sharwan Narayan, 45, was prosecuted by the Health Care Complaints Commission before the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), which this month found him guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct. The alleged incidents occurred between February and April 2020 while Dr Narayan was working at Moruya Medical Centre on the NSW south coast. The tribunal upheld complaints that on various occasions, Dr Narayan inappropriately touched the woman, identified as 'Patient A', inappropriately hugged her and made inappropriate sexualised comments. Patient A, now 31, first came under the care of Dr Narayan in January 2020 after seriously injuring her knee from falling on gravel. She was referred to the clinic by Moruya District Hospital. When she returned to the medical centre the following month to have her dressing changed, Dr Narayan suggested massage for her knee and told her he 'used to be a masseuse in Fiji and said he would book her in so he could massage it for therapy to make sure she did not get a deep vein thrombosis (DVT)', according to the tribunal's published decision. At her next appointment on February 11, Dr Narayan removed the dressing and massaged her knee for 10 to 15 minutes. At one appointment, Patient A, who disclosed that she was a sexual assault survivor, said Dr Narayan asked her to hug him. 'She thought it was a bit strange and she was a bit shocked,' the tribunal said. 'He did this for a few minutes.' The following week, she was lying down on the treatment table when Dr Narayan removed the dressing on her knee and started massaging her leg. She told the tribunal he 'pushed her dress up and massaged further up her leg so that his hands were quite close to her pubic area'. 'Patient A said she didn't say anything, she shut down. She had learned to disassociate during trauma she had suffered as a child. The massage lasted about 10 minutes.' He then told her he would perform a skin check, asking her to pull her dress down to her waist. 'Patient A said Dr Narayan started cupping her breasts,' the tribunal said. 'He tweaked or played with her nipples even though she had not said anything about having any issue with her nipples and considered that there was no need for him to examine them without wearing gloves. He said, 'Oh they're not hard', referring to her nipples. Patient A understood him to mean that she was not aroused. She froze and made a noncommittal response or noise, just waiting for it to be over which was in less than five minutes.' At her next appointment on March 13, Dr Narayan massaged her knee again. 'As he began moving up her leg towards her inner thigh, Dr Narayan started asking her about her sex life with her partner and whether her partner was able to give her orgasms,' the tribunal said. 'She said something like, 'No of course not.' Dr Narayan then touched the outside of her vagina. When Dr Narayan finished, he kept talking about 'sexual stuff'. He said it was a shame her partner was unable to give her an orgasm. He said he'd had a discussion with a lesbian couple and had taught them how to give each other the best orgasms.' Patient A told the tribunal she was thinking, 'What the hell is going on?', and realised Dr Narayan was acting inappropriately. 'Then he said, 'I can give you the best orgasm of your life,'' she said. 'I was like, 'OK.' He again asked me for a hug and I just stood there. I then left.' When she did not show up for a pre-booked appointment for a follow-up on a scan, she received a phone call from Dr Narayan, who asked why she hadn't come in for the appointment and apologised if he had made her uncomfortable at the last appointment. Dr Narayan asked Patient A to come to Batemans Bay Hospital that evening where he was working for a free DVT scan. 'Patient A said she felt more comfortable going to the hospital than the Centre possibly because there were more people there and security guards,' the tribunal said. 'At the hospital Dr Narayan gave her big blue Aldi shopping bag and said, 'This is for you. I'm sorry if I made you uncomfortable or I thought I may have made you feel uncomfortable so this is for you.' In the bag was a big tub of ice cream, kombucha, Dove moisturiser and chocolates. She estimated the contents would have cost more than $50. She thanked him.' Patient A did not return to the Centre until after Dr Narayan had left the practice. Counsel for Dr Narayan argued that Patient A's evidence was 'inexact, unclear, vague, lacking in detail and internally inconsistent', and highlighted a number of conflicting statements about the timeline of the alleged events. 'We do not consider that any of these matters impact adversely on the reliability of the evidence of Patient A,' the tribunal found. 'We add that we found Patient A an impressive witness who readily conceded when she was not able to remember something. We found Patient A to be candid and truthful when describing what she said Dr Narayan had done or said to her … we prefer the evidence of Patient A to the evidence of Dr Narayan where they conflict unless there is reliable contemporaneous evidence to the contrary.' The tribunal found that Dr Narayan's conduct was 'of a very serious nature and demonstrates a significant departure from accepted standards'. 'It is sufficiently serious to justify suspension or cancellation of his registration,' NCAT said. 'In arriving at this finding we take into account the following matters as indicators of the serious nature of that conduct. The Sexual Boundaries Code's definition of breaches of sexual boundaries includes the conduct of Dr Narayan — he conducted physical examinations which were not clinically indicated, he made sexual remarks, he touched Patient A in a sexual way and he used words and acted in a way that might reasonably be interpreted as being designed or intended to arouse or gratify sexual desire.' NCAT will determine protective orders following a further stage two hearing. Dr Narayan previously worked in medical imaging for 18 years before obtaining a Bachelor of Surgery from the University of Notre Dame in 2015. He was first registered to practice as a general practitioner in 2016 and was employed as a GP registrar at the Moruya Medical Centre from February 2019 to August 2020. The Medical Council of NSW suspended his registration in September 2020 based on a separate complaint. Three other complaints brought to NCAT by the HCCC in 2023 resulted in his registration being suspended for three months. He is currently working as a general practitioner on Norfolk Island, with conditions attached to his registration.
Zawya
4 days ago
- Business
- Zawya
Nigeria: NCAT to tackle infrastructure gap, adopts ICAO decarbonisation policy
The Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT) has announced steps to bridge the infrastructure gap in the country's aviation sector. The Rector of NCAT, Dr Danjuma Adamu Ismaila, assured that the institution remains committed to meeting the increasing demand for aviation training programmes. He stated that despite certain challenges, including insufficient accommodation, the college is working towards positioning itself as a premier centre for manpower development in Nigeria. To this end, NCAT is currently constructing a 150-room hostel and finalising plans to acquire a Boeing 727 flight simulation facility. According to Ismaila, this will enable the college to offer recurrent training for pilots within the country, thereby reducing the need for overseas travel. The college is also adopting the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) decarbonisation policy, which seeks to minimise the aviation industry's carbon emissions. As part of this initiative, NCAT is implementing an aggressive carbon emission reduction programme, which includes transitioning to solar and other alternative sources of power and energy. By embracing environmentally sustainable practices, the college aims to generate carbon credits. The Rector noted that NCAT has recorded significant achievements, including the training of numerous air traffic controllers from neighbouring countries in the English language—one of ICAO's requirements. He expressed confidence that the college will continue to advance its decarbonisation efforts and expand its curriculum to reflect evolving trends and technologies in the global air travel industry. Chairman of the League of Airports and Aviation Correspondents (LAAC), Comrade Idris Suleiman, commended NCAT for its contributions to the development of aviation in Nigeria. He encouraged the college to continue developing programmes that address the rapidly evolving trends in the sector and to provide training aligned with the needs of airlines, aviation agencies, and other stakeholders in the industry. Suleiman also praised the institution for its improved infrastructure and expressed optimism about NCAT's continued leadership in aviation training in Nigeria. He urged participants in the training course to engage with curiosity, commitment, and an open mind, and to make the most of the valuable learning opportunity. Copyright © 2022 Nigerian Tribune Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (
Courier-Mail
5 days ago
- Automotive
- Courier-Mail
Tesla Motors Australia appeals tribunal order after owner wins case over fault model S.
Don't miss out on the headlines from Motoring. Followed categories will be added to My News. Exclusive A NSW mum-of-three who won a tribunal hearing that ordered Tesla to replace her $93,000 Model S 'lemon' is still waiting for the vehicle after the electric car giant lodged a last-minute appeal. Anne Bishop, who is a passionate electric vehicle (EV) supporter, took the car manufacturer to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) in September 2024 alleging the 2015 model car she bought through their Tesla Certified Pre-Owned program in 2018 was riddled with faults. The Tribunal instructed Tesla to refund $6649.79 in repair costs and to supply the customer with a replacement vehicle of similar value and type. Tesla lodged a last-minute appeal against the ruling. The appeal is set to be heard on the 14th August 2025. MORE:Australia's brutal reaction to EVs X MORE:Staggering loss proves Cybertruck is dead 'When I bought this car, it was intended to be a once in a lifetime extravagance, a purchase designed to safeguard our growing family on the roads at a time when this was most important, and with the intention to keep the car for at least 20 years,' Ms Bishop told 'In February of last year, when the car broke down so comprehensively and inconveniently, two months out of warranty, all I expected was for Tesla to honour their word and pay for the repairs,' the NSW mother said. After experiencing more than a dozen major failures in the Model S, Ms Bishop escalated her complaints through to the Tesla Owners Club of Australia, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and NSW Fair Trading. But with no result, she turned to the NCAT. MORE:Musk's bombshell announcement, Tesla sinks NSW mother Anne Bishop with her $93,000 Tesla Model S. Picture: Supplied MORE:'Pure evil': New Tesla scandal erupts in US At the hearing, Ms Bishop sought reimbursement for her $8,500 repair costs (from a total of $17,000), a partial refund, or ideally a replacement vehicle. Over five and a half years of ownership, Ms Bishop said she experienced breakdowns of the car's media unit, battery failures, door handle malfunctions and, most recently, a rear drive motor failure. In her complaint, Ms Bishop explained that comments made by Tesla chief executive officer Elon Musk 'regarding the longevity, durability and quality of engineering and manufacturing in Tesla cars' prompted her to purchase the car. Ms Bishop sourced independent expert opinion as evidence for the NCAT. MORE:Musk, Tesla smashed by China 'military' ban 'I intend to never purchase another Tesla product again.' Picture: Supplied MORE:China hammers another nail in Tesla's coffin In a comment made outside of court, two automotive experts advised Ms Bishop that the car sold to her by Tesla was a 'lemon'. Both experts stated it was unreliable and unacceptable quality but most importantly unsafe to drive. 'It didn't seem unreasonable to expect a car I was paying close to six figures for, 'certified pre owned' from the manufacturer, that had originally sold for $165,000 and with the kind of promises made by Tesla's CEO, to comfortably exceed the durability of an entry-level car originally worth 1/10th of that price,' Ms Bishop said. In its ruling, the tribunal found Ms Bishop's vehicle had suffered a 'succession of issues affecting essential components', concluding that a reasonable consumer would not have purchased the car had they known of its condition. Elon Musk said Tesla 'won't forget' early adopters who 'took a risk'. Picture: Jim WATSON / AFP NCAT determined that the issues constituted a 'major failure' under Australia Consumer Law. 'The bottom line is that the applicant is left with a Vehicle which has, over the period of ownership, been unreliable and has suffered an ongoing series of faults to expensive components,' NCAT said in its ruling. Ms Bishop said she initially felt 'tremendously relieved that this entire nightmare' was finally over. 'I also felt justified in seeing the matter through, not only due to financial necessity, but also by now as a matter of principle and to set a precedent for other Tesla owners dissatisfied with poor quality and poor service.' Ms Bishop said. Tesla argued that repairs were conducted under warranty where possible and noted that some failures occurred after warranty expiration. The Tesla S 2019 was very popular in Australia. However, NCAT found that the list of issues justified a solution beyond warranty terms under consumer guarantee rights. At the hearing, Ms Bishop, who has remained supportive of electric vehicles, indicated that she preferred a replacement vehicle rather than a full refund. Tesla was ordered to replace the vehicle but the auto giant lodged a last-minute appeal. 'When several weeks had passed with no word from Tesla after receiving the order from NCAT, I emailed them, in the hopes of negotiating the details necessary to finalise the matter in accordance with the order,' Ms Bishop said. 'I never received the courtesy of a response, but a week later a law firm filed a Notice of Appeal with NCAT.' The matter remains unresolved. Tesla Australia did not respond to requests for comment. Originally published as Exclusive: Tesla escalates battle after tribunal order
Daily Telegraph
5 days ago
- Automotive
- Daily Telegraph
Tesla Motors Australia appeals tribunal order after owner wins case over fault model S.
Don't miss out on the headlines from Motoring. Followed categories will be added to My News. Exclusive A NSW mum-of-three who won a tribunal hearing that ordered Tesla to replace her $93,000 Model S 'lemon' is still waiting for the vehicle after the electric car giant lodged a last-minute appeal. Anne Bishop, who is a passionate electric vehicle (EV) supporter, took the car manufacturer to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) in September 2024 alleging the 2015 model car she bought through their Tesla Certified Pre-Owned program in 2018 was riddled with faults. The Tribunal instructed Tesla to refund $6649.79 in repair costs and to supply the customer with a replacement vehicle of similar value and type. Tesla lodged a last-minute appeal against the ruling. The appeal is set to be heard on the 14th August 2025. MORE:Australia's brutal reaction to EVs MORE:Staggering loss proves Cybertruck is dead 'When I bought this car, it was intended to be a once in a lifetime extravagance, a purchase designed to safeguard our growing family on the roads at a time when this was most important, and with the intention to keep the car for at least 20 years,' Ms Bishop told 'In February of last year, when the car broke down so comprehensively and inconveniently, two months out of warranty, all I expected was for Tesla to honour their word and pay for the repairs,' the NSW mother said. After experiencing more than a dozen major failures in the Model S, Ms Bishop escalated her complaints through to the Tesla Owners Club of Australia, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and NSW Fair Trading. But with no result, she turned to the NCAT. MORE:Musk's bombshell announcement, Tesla sinks NSW mother Anne Bishop with her $93,000 Tesla Model S. Picture: Supplied MORE:'Pure evil': New Tesla scandal erupts in US At the hearing, Ms Bishop sought reimbursement for her $8,500 repair costs (from a total of $17,000), a partial refund, or ideally a replacement vehicle. Over five and a half years of ownership, Ms Bishop said she experienced breakdowns of the car's media unit, battery failures, door handle malfunctions and, most recently, a rear drive motor failure. In her complaint, Ms Bishop explained that comments made by Tesla chief executive officer Elon Musk 'regarding the longevity, durability and quality of engineering and manufacturing in Tesla cars' prompted her to purchase the car. Ms Bishop sourced independent expert opinion as evidence for the NCAT. MORE:Musk, Tesla smashed by China 'military' ban 'I intend to never purchase another Tesla product again.' Picture: Supplied MORE:China hammers another nail in Tesla's coffin In a comment made outside of court, two automotive experts advised Ms Bishop that the car sold to her by Tesla was a 'lemon'. Both experts stated it was unreliable and unacceptable quality but most importantly unsafe to drive. 'It didn't seem unreasonable to expect a car I was paying close to six figures for, 'certified pre owned' from the manufacturer, that had originally sold for $165,000 and with the kind of promises made by Tesla's CEO, to comfortably exceed the durability of an entry-level car originally worth 1/10th of that price,' Ms Bishop said. In its ruling, the tribunal found Ms Bishop's vehicle had suffered a 'succession of issues affecting essential components', concluding that a reasonable consumer would not have purchased the car had they known of its condition. Elon Musk said Tesla 'won't forget' early adopters who 'took a risk'. Picture: Jim WATSON / AFP NCAT determined that the issues constituted a 'major failure' under Australia Consumer Law. 'The bottom line is that the applicant is left with a Vehicle which has, over the period of ownership, been unreliable and has suffered an ongoing series of faults to expensive components,' NCAT said in its ruling. Ms Bishop said she initially felt 'tremendously relieved that this entire nightmare' was finally over. 'I also felt justified in seeing the matter through, not only due to financial necessity, but also by now as a matter of principle and to set a precedent for other Tesla owners dissatisfied with poor quality and poor service.' Ms Bishop said. Tesla argued that repairs were conducted under warranty where possible and noted that some failures occurred after warranty expiration. The Tesla S 2019 was very popular in Australia. However, NCAT found that the list of issues justified a solution beyond warranty terms under consumer guarantee rights. At the hearing, Ms Bishop, who has remained supportive of electric vehicles, indicated that she preferred a replacement vehicle rather than a full refund. Tesla was ordered to replace the vehicle but the auto giant lodged a last-minute appeal. 'When several weeks had passed with no word from Tesla after receiving the order from NCAT, I emailed them, in the hopes of negotiating the details necessary to finalise the matter in accordance with the order,' Ms Bishop said. 'I never received the courtesy of a response, but a week later a law firm filed a Notice of Appeal with NCAT.' The matter remains unresolved. Tesla Australia did not respond to requests for comment. Originally published as Exclusive: Tesla escalates battle after tribunal order
India Today
21-05-2025
- Health
- India Today
Indian-origin Sydney doctor sues tribunal after licence suspended over vaginal test
An Indian-origin doctor, Mohanadas Balasingham, was barred in Sydney, Australia, from practising for three years after he allegedly asked a female patient about her sexual history and touched her inappropriately. Balasingham has denied all the allegations and filed an AUD 20-million counter-claim against the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), which debarred him from practice for three NCAT heard last month that the doctor asked the patient inappropriate questions about her sexual history, according to a report in The Daily Mail. Balasingham is a General Practitioner and was first registered as a medical practitioner in India in 1987 and then in New South Wales in woman visited Balasingham's clinic in the western suburb of Merrylands on September 5, 2020, after she missed a period and had stomach cramps, The Daily Mail reported. The questions included the number of sexual partners she had been with as well as when she had first become sexually active, according to the ALLEGEDLY ASKED A SERIES OF INAPPROPRIATE QUESTIONSDr Balasingham also reportedly asked the woman, "how many boyfriends were Nepalese and how many are Australian?"According to the report, the tribunal also heard that he performed a vaginal examination on the patient but did not obtain informed consent or offer her a chaperone.A chaperone is a person who stays in the room with the patient and the doctor, especially during sensitive exams, to make sure everything is appropriate and woman said that during the examination, something didn't feel normal or appropriate to her. She felt uncomfortable. After leaving the medical practice with her partner, she became very upset and was in tears by the time they reached their FOUND GUILTY OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCTThe patient complained to the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) two days later, which was heard by NCAT in month, the tribunal imposed protective orders on Balasingham, barring him from being registered for three years. Balasingham was found guilty of both unsatisfactory professional conduct and professional misconduct on November 28, 2023, The Daily Mail denied all allegations against him during the tribunal also filed an application in court seeking AUD $20 million as compensation, claiming HCCC had fabricated allegations and that the woman had labelled false allegations to extort money from him.
