Dismissal of the complaint against the refusal of the license to practice as a dentist

Facts

The complainant, [X.] , is a federally certified dentist who has been practicing since 1976. He had his own practice in [A.] /LU from 1980 to 1995 and then worked in a dental laboratory in [B.] /LU. In August 1999, he received the license to practice independently as a dentist in the canton of Schwyz and opened his own dental and Ayur-Veda practice in [C.] /SZ in 2000.

In September 2000, [X.] was found guilty and punished for multiple instances of exploiting a situation of distress and exceeding the permitted maximum speed. In March 2001, the government council of the canton of Schwyz revoked [X.] 's license to practice independently as a dentist for five years. The administrative court of the canton of Schwyz dismissed a complaint filed against this decision in principle.

[X.] submitted an application for reinstatement of his license to practice in June 2006, which was rejected. He filed a complaint with the administrative court of the canton of Schwyz, which was also rejected. [X.] then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.

Considerations

1. Admissibility of the complaint

The Federal Court can consider the complaint since it was filed in a timely and formal manner and the complainant has a legitimate interest in having the decision annulled or amended.

2. Credibility of the dentist

The lower court assumes that the concept of an unblemished reputation is equivalent to that of credibility in the sense of Art. 36 para. 1 lit. b MedPA. The complainant must provide assurance of impeccable personal conduct in the practice of his profession.

3. Complainant's misconduct

After the revocation of his license to practice, the complainant continued to perform dental treatments and was punished for doing so. He also committed offenses against the road traffic regulations. The lower court was entitled to establish, without arbitrariness, that the complainant performed the treatments in question in [C.] .

4. Psychiatric evaluation

The complainant underwent a psychiatric evaluation, which diagnosed an organic psychosyndrome with suspected personality change and a histrionic personality disorder. The complainant's objections to the evaluation are unfounded.

5. Freedom of trade

The complainant's freedom of trade is not violated by the contested decision. The cantonal authorities may make the authorization to practice dependent…