[ad_1]
Noted equestrian veterinarian Timothy Brennan will be suspended from the veterinary registry for two months after the High Court confirmed a recommendation from the Veterinary Council of Ireland.
Judge Mary Irvine said that while she considered the length of the suspension to be lenient, it was not unreasonable.
The suspension will begin on December 20.
The Board requested suspension arising from the professional misconduct determination against Mr. Brennan.
The request stemmed from an inspection conducted by Department of Agriculture officials in a horse trainer’s yard on February 9, 2015, which identified poorly labeled bottes without serial numbers.
When Mr. Brennan’s vehicle was inspected, five bottles of unauthorized animal remedies were found and seized and Mr. Brennan admitted in a subsequent interview with officials that he had no records of his practice of the seized products.
Brennan, of GSC Veterinary, Gowran Castle Stud, Gowran, Co Kilkenny, pleaded guilty in 2018 in Kilkenny District Court to three counts of having unauthorized animal medications and one of failing to keep records regarding a listed animal remedy. .
A Council fitness committee carried out an investigation in October 2018 in which Mr. Brennan admitted facts in relation to allegations against him of breaches of some of the European Communities Regulations (Remedies for animals ) of 2007.
The committee found the accusations proven.
Last October, the council considered the committee’s report and found the professional misconduct to be extremely serious.
Having considered mitigating factors, it recommended a two-month suspension of Mr. Brennan’s registration.
Today, Judge Irvine said the council was legally wrong to treat as mitigating factors that there were “devastating personal tragedies” in Brennan’s life at the time of the misconduct and her opinion that the misconduct will not recur.
Mr. Brennan, like all members of his profession, is required to practice in accordance with relevant professional standards, he said.
However, he decided not to return the matter to the council for reconsideration.
While it is important to remind professionals whose conduct is subject to sanction that it is not the function of the courts to simply “seal” the decisions of their governing bodies, this is not a case for the court to impose a different sanction than the recommended one. , she said.
His own opinion that the sanction was less strict than it should have been was not a basis for setting it aside, he said.
The sanction still makes clear the seriousness of the misconduct and signals the seriousness of it to other members of the profession, he said.
[ad_2]