Professional discipline decision arising from a member's admissions that she performed or billed for fixed prosthodontic treatment despite an undertaking and remediation order restricting that work, and that she used a business name inconsistent with the register.
The panel held that the agreed facts substantiated all allegations of professional misconduct on a balance of probabilities and emphasized the member's disregard for patient protection and regulatory obligations.
Applying the public-interest standard for joint submissions, the panel accepted a jointly proposed sanction consisting of a reprimand, an eight-month suspension, extensive practice conditions, mentoring, monitoring, and costs.
A publication ban protected the identity of patients named in the notice of hearing and agreed statement of facts.
