An optometrist who tampered with more than 400 glasses prescriptions has lost a bid to have his five-year ban overturned, with an Adelaide court upholding the "significant sanction" with a view to protecting the public.
In May last year, South Australia's Supreme Court overturned the original 12-month penalty handed to Ashok Bhoola and imposed one five times as long.
The SA Civil and Administrative Tribunal had earlier found Mr Bhoola secretly and dishonestly altered the prescriptions of his business partner's patients on 410 occasions in 2015 and 2016.
Mr Bhoola, who was a partner in the West Lakes Specsavers franchise in Adelaide at the time, had denied altering the prescriptions.
The Supreme Court's decision was in response to an appeal by the Optometry Board of Australia, who argued the initial punishment was too lenient.
After that was upheld, Mr Bhoola then launched his own appeal in which he sought to restore the initial penalty, downplaying the likelihood of recidivism and arguing against the appeal judge's finding that the original sanction "was inadequate".
Some appeal grounds considered by court
But in a judgement handed down earlier this month, SA's Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal on two of four grounds.
While it granted leave to appeal on the remaining two grounds, the court then dismissed the appeal, finding that "no different sanction should be imposed".
"The applicant has provided no explanation for his conduct or insight into his behaviour," the judgement stated.
"The applicant’s conduct was a serious departure from the standards required of the profession. A substantial sanction was required to protect the public and maintain confidence in the profession.
"Accordingly, it follows that the appeal must be dismissed."
Justices Chris Bleby, Sophie David and Malcolm Blue said Mr Bhoola's conduct hurt his fellow optometrist and business partner, "who suffered from significant embarrassment and a loss of confidence".
"It also caused significant expense to Specsavers, both in respect of the cost of the glasses which had to be remade and in terms of the cost of the investigation it undertook," they said.
