DOCTOR’S ALLEGATIONS

Taranaki Daily News, 20 February 1935, Page 7

DOCTOR’S ALLEGATIONS

PETITION TO PARLIAMENT ECHO OF COMPENSATION CASE. ACTION OF MR. JUSTICE FRAZER. PRACTICE ALLEGEDLY RUINED. <By Wire.—Parliamentary Reporter). Wellington, Last Night. The allegation that Mr. Justice Frazer at the end of a compensation claim hearing in the Arbitration Court in 1933 had been guilty of extra-judicial conduct amounting to a grave irregularity which brought ruin to the petitioner is made in a petition presented to Parliament today on behalf of Dr. R. Walter Richards, medical practitioner, Wellington. The petitioner asks that the matters he raises be referred to a Parliamentary committee, that steps be taken to reinstate him with the firms and officials to whom he alleges the remarks of the judge were conveyed, that compensation be made to him for alleged loss and damage, and that the law be amended to protect witnesses from the irregularities complained of. According to the petitioner, who formerly derived the most substantial part of his income from his position as medical officer to the Waterside Workers’ Union, patients from the union ceased to consult him shortly after the hearing of a compensation case in November, 1933. “After some months of perplexity,” the petitioner adds, “I was made aware that at the conclusion of the hearing of my case the President of the Court, Mr. Justice Frazer, had informed a number of people present in my absence that in the future he would not accept certificates or evidence on medical matters from me, and further that he had gone on to direct counsel present to notify workers’ unions, insurance companies and other persons and parties interested in compensation matters of this decision by him.” . „ . The petitioner states that he is advised that the conduct of the judge was extra-judicial and that he had not the right or authority to make such a statement or at any time to refuse to accept certificates or evidence from the petitioner. The suggestion made by the president was acted upon by those present, and his intention to refuse the petitioner’s testimony was communicated to the Waterside Workers’ Union, insurance institutions, British Medical Association and the medical council. As a result the petitioner claims that he has been gravely injured in his reputation and calling and his income has been reduced almosi to nothing. The action of the president in thus expressing his intention and requesting its communication to others, the petitioner declares, amounts to a grave irregularity and one which has brought ruin to the petitioner. Insofar as :t was action concerted with the parties who acted upon it the action was tantamount, the petitioner alleges, to a conspiratory to ruin him.