Durban - A foreign-trained doctor, who has launched a legal challenge to be allowed to retake a qualifying board exam to practise in South Africa, is not backing down from his fight.
This week Shalen Naidoo succeeded in having the University of KwaZulu-Natal joined as a respondent in his high court battle.
In the Durban High Court, Judge King Ndlovu granted a court order to join the university to the application and directed it to hand all documents related to the decisions to fail Naidoo in his April 2014 practical exam and not allow him to retake the exam.
The university, on behalf of the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA), conducts the board exam for foreign-qualified doctors, which they have to pass to be allowed to register as interns.
Naidoo brought legal action against the HPCSA, its board and the Professional Boards administrator after he failed the board exam three time and the HPCSA’s rules did not allow him to retake it because doctors are only allowed three opportunities to write the exam.
In his court papers, Naidoo said he obtained his Bachelor of Science honours degree in human physiology from the University of Pretoria in 2006. He then obtained a Bachelor of Medicine from the University of Oradea in Romania which allowed him to practise as a doctor in Romania or anywhere in Europe.
South African authorities did not recognise the degree and he was required to pass the board’s exam, which consisted of written and practical components that had to be passed in a single attempt.
He attempted the exam in April 2013, but failed the written test. He wrote again in October that year and passed the written test but failed the practical.
In April last year he passed the written test but failed the practical exam.
In his application to join UKZN, Naidoo said he established that the university administered the exams, determined the marking standard, assessed the candidates and quantified his marks.
“It appears the fourth respondent (UKZN) took the decisions or assisted in taking the decisions.”
In correspondence with UKZN’s attorney, which was in the court file, Naidoo’s attorney said it appeared that Naidoo’s marks had been incorrectly quantified for three stations and his answer at another station had been incorrectly marked in the April 2014 practical exam.
In a replying letter, which was in the court file, the university’s attorney disputed the allegations.
The letter stated the exam was practical and score sheets were used as a guideline to ensure the assessments were fair.
“Candidates are expected to demonstrate a particular skill and procedure. The examiner observes the candidate and uses the guideline that is printed on the score sheet.”
The matter is yet to be set down for argument.
The Mercury