The High Court has restrained the Health Service Executive from proceeding with an investigation, in its current form, into allegations against consultant surgeon Pawan Rajpal. The order does not stop the HSE’s disciplinary process as a whole or prevent it from taking further action under the contractual procedure.
In a judgment delivered on 1 February 2024, Ms Justice Egan found that Mr Rajpal had raised a fair question for trial over whether the HSE chief executive had delegated a decision-making function that the consultant’s contract reserved to the CEO. The investigator’s terms of reference required findings on the balance of probabilities about disputed facts central to the allegations. The judge said deciding those facts, as well as whether they amounted to misconduct, was for the CEO.
The case concerns allegations of sexual assault and harassment involving a fellow staff member, prescription practices involving two non-consultant hospital doctors, and showing CCTV footage of the staff member to colleagues. These remain allegations; the judgment did not determine whether they were true. Mr Rajpal denied the assault allegation and disputed the prescription claims.
The judge also identified procedural concerns about how the CCTV allegation was raised. It was put to Mr Rajpal at a meeting without advance written notice, and the details in the investigation’s terms of reference lacked specificity. However, she concluded that the notice problem could be rectified and did not, by itself, show that the process had gone irretrievably wrong. She found no sufficient basis at this stage to halt the process over the other grounds raised, including the civil standard of proof, possible overlap with Garda and Medical Council inquiries, or alleged contamination by the hospital’s general manager.
The decisive issue was the investigator’s role in resolving disputed facts. The judge said that once the investigation proceeded in the form set out in the terms of reference, the potential unlawful delegation would be difficult to correct later. She was satisfied that Mr Rajpal had raised a fair question on this ground, taking account of the demanding standard for intervening in an unfinished disciplinary process.
The balance of justice also favoured pausing the investigation in its current form, the judge said, given the potential harm to Mr Rajpal’s reputation and livelihood from adverse findings. She noted that he continued working at Cavan General Hospital and that the CEO had not placed him on paid administrative leave.
The court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the investigation as then convened. It did not halt the Appendix IV disciplinary process in its entirety. The judge said the HSE remained entitled to take disciplinary action in accordance with the contract. She reserved the formal orders to a further hearing with the parties.