The High Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (TSJCV) has upheld a 15-day suspension without pay imposed by the Regional Ministry of Health on a specialist doctor at Torrevieja Hospital. The penalty stems from a very serious offence involving his repeated refusal to attend to various patients, leading to 47 user complaints in just over three months.
The Social Chamber of the court dismissed an appeal filed by the practitioner against an earlier ruling by the Labour Court Number 1 of Elche. Dated 7th July, the TSJCV sentence determined that there was no clear error, arbitrariness, or irrationality in how the evidence was evaluated during the first instance.
The disciplinary measure dates back to June 2023, when the Ministry of Health issued the 15-day suspension without pay to the specialist, who was serving as the Head of the Dermatology Department at Torrevieja Hospital at the time. The decision was subsequently endorsed by the court in Elche.
According to the established facts, the Patient Attention and Information Service (SAIP) logged 47 complaints linked to the department and attributed to the same specialist between 1st January and 9th March 2023. Nine of those complaints were formally submitted in writing.
The grievances repeatedly highlighted an unjustified refusal to provide specialist care or to accept appointment requests referred by primary care doctors and other specialists. Additionally, the filings detailed complaints regarding alleged inappropriate or degrading treatment of patients.
Documentation in the administrative file revealed that affected users included individuals suffering from conditions such as bleeding lesions, pustular psoriasis, rapidly evolving tumours, and nodular melanoma.
The court ruling further noted a considerably larger volume of issues over an extended timeframe. Specifically, the initial sentence recorded 202 verbal and written complaints to the SAIP within a single year, mainly related to the systematic rejection of consultation requests by the former Head of Dermatology.
In his appeal, the doctor claimed that his rights to effective judicial protection and the presumption of innocence had been infringed, arguing that the alleged infractions were not proven. However, the TSJCV rejected these claims, ruling that the Elche court had sufficiently justified the credibility assigned to the administrative records.
Magistrates also addressed arguments raised by the doctor regarding clinical schedule management directives and patient prioritisation guidelines. The court noted that such instructions did not exempt him from fulfilling the fundamental duties of his role.
Furthermore, the tribunal concluded that the repeated and unjustified rejection of specialist care requests compromised patients’ rights to receive appropriate care delivered with due quality and diligence.
The TSJCV resolution is not yet final, as it remains subject to a potential appeal for the unification of doctrine before the Supreme Court.
Other Articles
