Charge Detail Summary

Return
File Number: Phar18/424P
Practitioner: El-Fadil Kardaman


Hearing Start Date:

Hearing End Date:

14/11/2018

14/11/2018


Hearing Town/City: Wellington

Hearing Location:

Chancellor 2, James Cook Hotel Grand Chancellor, 147 The Terrrace, Wellington, commencing at 9.30am

Executive Officer: Ms Kim Davies (04) 381 6816


Charge Characteristics:

Authority - failed to engage / comply (Established)


Additional Orders:

Name Suppression to Practitioner

Practitioner granted interim name suppression

985Phar18424P.pdf


Name Suppression to Witness/s and/or Family of parties

Order for permanent name suppression of the names and any identifying features of the practitioner's family members.

1004Phar18424P.pdf


Name Suppression to Practitioner

Practitioner declined permanent name suppression

1004Phar18424P.pdf


Appeal Order:


Decision:

Full Decision 1004Phar18424P.pdf


Appeal Decision:


Precis of Decision:

Mr El-Fadil Kardaman

 

Charge

 

On 14 November 2018 the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal considered a charge of professional misconduct laid by a Professional Conduct Committee against Mr El-Fadil Kardaman, registered pharmacist of Auckland (the Pharmacist).

 

The charge alleged the Pharmacist:

 

1. failed to attend to recertification requirements as required by the Pharmacy Council between 2007 and 2016;

 

2. failed to submit complete recertification records for audit in 2009 and 2011; and

 

3. failed to complete competency programmes in 2014 and 2015.

 

Finding

 

The hearing proceeded on the basis of an agreed summary of facts and the Pharmacist accepted that his conduct amounted to professional misconduct warranting disciplinary sanction.

 

The Tribunal found the charge was established in respect of each of the particulars, and that his conduct amounted to both negligence and conduct that is likely to bring discredit to the pharmacy profession.

 

Penalty

 

The Tribunal censured the Pharmacist and imposed conditions on his practice for two years.  The Tribunal further ordered the Pharmacist pay a fine of $3,000 and costs of $19, 974.

 

The Tribunal directed publication of its decision and a summary.