The Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others v Grieve

Dr David Stephen Grieve, a registered medical practitioner, was charged by the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) with unprofessional conduct. The allegations were that between 2004 and 2009 he improperly persuaded some of his patients and former patients to invest in a financially distressed company of which he was a director, transferred invested funds into his private bank account, and caused financial prejudice to those patients. When disciplinary proceedings were instituted, Dr Grieve raised a point in limine contending that the HPCSA lacked jurisdiction because the alleged conduct did not relate to the practice of medicine or the rendering of health services. The Professional Conduct Committee dismissed the point in limine. Dr Grieve unsuccessfully attempted an internal appeal and then sought judicial review in the Gauteng High Court, which upheld his jurisdictional challenge and set aside the Council’s decision. The HPCSA appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the point in limine with costs and remitting the matter to the Professional Conduct Committee for continuation of the disciplinary proceedings.

This case affirms the wide disciplinary jurisdiction of the Health Professions Council of South Africa and clarifies that unprofessional conduct is not limited to clinical malpractice or conduct occurring during medical treatment. It reinforces the Council’s role as the primary guardian of ethical standards and morality within the health professions, and confirms that disciplinary action may be taken for unethical conduct even in the absence of a criminal conviction or specific regulatory prohibition.