Special event - defined by Ministerial order under section 5(1). The Minister may declare “any sporting, cultural or other event” that will “attract a significant number of participants from other countries” (s 5(2)). The phrase “significant number” is not quantified and is left entirely to the Minister’s opinion, so the Act could cover the Olympic Games or a one‑day international rugby match, depending on ministerial appetite. The order must specify the exemption period (or periods) and the notice procedure for visiting health professionals (ss 5(3)-(5)). The exemption period can include time before and after the event (s 5(4)), allowing treatment for pre‑event training, acclimatisation and post‑event care. Orders may be revoked or varied (s 5(7)), which adds uncertainty for practitioners who may have arranged travel based on an order that is later amended.

Visitor - defined in section 6 in two limbs. Limb (a) catches a person who is a resident of another country and is in NSW for the purpose of officially participating in a special event, or preparing, training, practising, rehearsing or acclimatising for such an event. Limb (b) extends the definition to an Australian resident who is part of a group the majority of which are foreign residents in NSW for the same purpose. This second limb covers, for example, an Australian athlete who trains with a predominantly foreign team. Importantly, the visitor must be “in the State” for the specified purpose; a visitor who stays on as a tourist after the event is no longer a visitor for the Act. The definition does not include family members, support staff, media or spectators unless they fall under the preparation limb - a gap that event organisers need to manage.

Visiting health professional - defined in section 7 as an individual who is a resident of another country, is “appointed, employed, contracted or otherwise engaged” to provide health care services to a visitor, and has given notice of that intention in accordance with the order. The phrase “otherwise engaged” is broad and could capture volunteers, team doctors employed by a foreign national governing body, or even practitioners who are informally asked to treat a visitor. The notice requirement is the key gatekeeping step: no notice, no exemption. The Act does not specify what information the notice must contain; that is left to the order, which creates reliance on the Minister’s procedural design.

Health care services - defined by reference to services ordinarily provided by a health practitioner under the National Law, plus any other service prescribed by regulation (section 3). This is potentially very broad, covering not only doctors, nurses and dentists but also allied health practitioners such as physiotherapists, psychologists and chiropractors, as long as they are ordinarily regulated under the National Law. The regulation‑making power allows the scope to be expanded without amending the Act.

Restricted substance and drug of addiction - means a substance specified in Schedule Four or Schedule Eight respectively of the Poisons List proclaimed under the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966. The distinction matters because a visiting health professional may issue a prescription for either only if specifically authorised by the order (s 10(1)). Even without authorisation, section 9(4) imposes a mandatory condition: the visiting professional must not possess or supply any substance that an equivalent local health professional could not possess or supply under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 or the Poisons Act. This ties the foreign practitioner’s permissible substances to what a registered local practitioner could handle, which is a sensible floor but creates complexity because the “equivalent local health professional” is not directly defined. Section 9(5) defines “local health professional” as a registered health practitioner under the National Law who is not a visiting health professional, but it does not say that the equivalent is the registration class that most closely matches the visiting professional’s qualifications. The visiting orthopaedic surgeon, for example, must look to what an Australian orthopaedic surgeon can possess, not what a podiatrist can. That comparability exercise may be non‑trivial for visiting professionals unfamiliar with Australian scheduling.

Visiting health professionals - the primary beneficiaries. They are exempt from the usual requirement to hold Australian registration to practise in NSW, but only during the exemption period and only for treating visitors for whom they are engaged. The practical burden on them includes: (a) ensuring their engagement fits section 7(b); (b) giving notice through the specified procedure, which may require coordination with the event organiser; (c) understanding and complying with any conditions imposed by the order or regulations; (d) knowing which restricted or addictive substances they may prescribe, possess or supply without stepping outside the exemption; and (e) understanding that they lose immunity if they treat a non‑visitor or act after the exemption period ends. Because the Act bars complaints and disciplinary action (s 12(1)), a visiting professional who causes harm may face civil litigation but not disciplinary proceedings - a double‑edged sword that reduces regulatory risk but might make it harder to defend a malpractice claim without the context of a disciplinary finding.

Visitors - the intended recipients of care. They can be treated by their own team’s health staff without needing to navigate the local system. They also receive an exemption from offences under the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act and the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act for possessing substances as a result of that care (s 11(2)). However, they lose the protection of the local complaints and disciplinary framework, which is a material reduction in patient rights. If a visitor is harmed by a visiting professional, they cannot file a complaint with the Health Care Complaints Commission or the National Board; their only recourse is civil litigation (if they can locate and sue a foreign defendant) or a complaint in the professional’s home jurisdiction, which is likely unfamiliar and may not be effective.

Event organisers - they must apply to the Minister for a special event declaration, propose the exemption period and notice procedure, and then coordinate the notice process for all visiting health professionals. They also bear the practical burden of ensuring that conditions are communicated and complied with, because a breach by a visiting professional could jeopardise the exemption for others or create liability for the organiser under other laws (e.g., workplace health and safety). The organiser’s incentive is to get the declaration and minimise conditions; the Act gives no standing to local health practitioners who might object.

Local health practitioners - section 14 says the Act does not prejudice or affect their lawful occupation, trade or business. That means local practitioners are not barred from treating visitors, but they are also not guaranteed any right to be engaged. The Act creates no subsidy or preference for local providers; visiting teams may bring their own staff and bypass local practitioners entirely. For a major event, this can represent a significant opportunity cost for local clinics and hospitals that might otherwise service visiting athletes and support personnel.

Pharmacists and drug suppliers - they may be authorised under the order to dispense prescriptions written by visiting professionals or to supply substances by wholesale to visiting professionals. The Act requires that the supplier be licensed under the Poisons Act and be authorised under the order (s 10(2)(d)). This creates a two‑step authorisation: the supplier needs both their usual Poisons Act licence and a specific order authorising them to supply to visiting professionals. Without that authorisation, they commit an offence if they fill a visiting professional’s prescription, even if it is a lawful prescription in the professional’s home country.

The Minister - has significant discretionary power: deciding whether to declare an event, setting the exemption period, prescribing conditions, authorising substance prescribing/supply, and even excluding persons or classes from the Act entirely (s 13). The Minister also has a duty under section 10(3) not to authorise prescribing of restricted substances or drugs of addiction unless satisfied that adequate arrangements exist to keep those substances within the visitor cohort. The Act provides no criteria for that satisfaction, leaving it to ministerial judgement and creating a risk that authorisation might be granted or withheld inconsistently.

The Governor (in Executive Council) - may make regulations with offence penalties up to 10 penalty units (s 15). This allows the executive to fill gaps in the Act, but also to create new criminal offences without parliamentary amendment of the primary Act.

For visiting health professionals: Right: Authorised to provide health care services to visitors for whom they are engaged, during the exemption period, while complying with the Act, regulations and any conditions (s 8). That authorisation overrides the usual prohibition on unregistered practice. Right: Does not commit offences under the National Law, Poisons Act or Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act for providing those services, possessing/supplying substances in that course, prescribing in accordance with the Act, or using their usual professional title (s 11(1)). Duty: Must not possess or supply any substance that an equivalent local health professional could not possess or supply (s 9(4)). This is a mandatory condition, not optional. Duty: Must give notice of intention to provide services via the procedure specified in the order (s 7(c)). Without this, they are not a visiting health professional and have no exemption. Duty: Must comply with any conditions imposed by the order or the regulations (s 8(2)(b)). The Act does not specify how those conditions are communicated; the visiting professional must find them in the Gazette or via the event organiser. Duty: May only issue a written prescription for a restricted substance or drug of addiction if authorised by the order (s 10(1)). Unauthorised prescribing is not exempted and would be an offence under the Poisons Act.

For visitors: Right: Does not commit an offence under the Poisons Act or Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act for possessing a substance as a result of being treated under the Act (s 11(2)). No right: To lodge a complaint under the Health Care Complaints Act or the National Law about a visiting professional (s 12(1)). This is a deliberate trade‑off; the visitor’s redress is limited to civil proceedings or a complaint in the home country.

For suppliers: Right: To supply a restricted substance or drug of addiction on a visiting professional’s prescription, and to supply substances by wholesale to a visiting professional, if authorised by the order and (for wholesale) if the supplier is already licensed under the Poisons Act (s 11(3)). Duty: Must comply with any conditions on their own Poisons Act licence (s 11(3)(b)(iii)).

For event organisers and the Minister: No specific duties are imposed on event organisers in the Act, though they will need to coordinate the notice procedure. The Minister has a duty under section 10(3) not to authorise prescribing or supply of restricted substances/drugs of addiction unless satisfied that adequate arrangements confine those substances to visitors. This is a public‑interest safeguard, but it is unenforceable by any private party and its breach does not create a private cause of action.

No duty of care or reporting obligation is created by the Act. The Act does not require visiting professionals to carry indemnity insurance, to report adverse events, or to maintain records. These gaps may be filled by conditions in a particular order, but are not guaranteed.

The Act itself creates no criminal offences. Instead, it provides exemptions from offences that would otherwise exist under three major Acts: the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW), the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 and the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. If a visiting health professional steps outside the authorised scope - for example, treating a non‑visitor, practising after the exemption period ends, or possessing a substance that an equivalent local practitioner could not - the exemption evaporates and the full force of those Acts applies. The practical penalty exposure is therefore whatever the underlying law provides: for unregistered practice under the National Law, significant fines and potentially imprisonment under other provisions. The Act’s enforcement model is thus one of withdrawal of immunity, not of direct enforcement.

Under section 15(2), the regulations may create offences punishable by a penalty not exceeding 10 penalty units (currently $1,100). Such offences would be tried summarily in the Local Court (s 16). This gives the Executive a limited capacity to criminalise specific conduct without amending the Act.

The Act also blocks two avenues of accountability: complaints and disciplinary action. Section 12(1) provides that no complaint may be made about a visiting health professional under the Health Care Complaints Act 1993 or the National Law, and no disciplinary action may be taken under those laws. However, this bar does not apply if the person is already a registered health practitioner or a student under the National Law (s 12(2)). That carve‑out means that a visiting professional who happens to hold dual registration (e.g., a New Zealand doctor also registered in Australia) can still be subject to complaints and discipline for conduct during the event, even if their conduct otherwise falls within the exemption. The bar does not prevent criminal proceedings under the underlying Acts, so a visiting professional who commits a crime (e.g., assault, fraud, drug trafficking) can still be prosecuted.

The practical enforcement challenge is significant. A visiting professional who breaches conditions and returns overseas before detection will be difficult to pursue. The Act does not impose any obligation on the event organiser to report breaches, and the Minister has no monitoring powers under the Act. The exemption from disciplinary action also means there is no mechanism for interim prohibition orders, restrictions on practice, or mandatory reporting of concerns, as exist under the National Law for registered practitioners. This creates a regulatory blind spot: if a visiting professional is believed to be providing substandard care, there is no way to stop them mid‑event except by revoking the special event order (s 5(7)), which would affect all other visiting professionals. A more targeted option is the Minister’s power under section 13 to exclude a particular person from the Act, but that requires a gazetted order and the event may be nearly over by the time it is published.

The Act operates as a temporary override of three principal pieces of health regulation and one complaints statute. Its interaction with each is expressly dealt with.

Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW): The Act exempts visiting health professionals from offences under the National Law for providing health care services (s 11(1)(a)), holding out, and using professional titles (s 11(1)(d)-(e)). This means a visiting professional does not need to be registered under the National Law during the exemption period. However, the exemption is personal: it only covers the visiting professional, not any Australian‑registered practitioners who assist them. Section 14 states that the Act does not prejudice or affect the lawful occupation, trade or business of any registered health practitioner, so the National Law continues to apply in full to local practitioners. The Act also overrides the National Law’s complaints and disciplinary provisions for visiting professionals (s 12(1)), though criminal proceedings under the National Law (e.g., for holding out to be a specialist without registration) are not barred.

Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966: The Act provides exemptions from offences under this Act for visiting professionals providing authorised services, possessing or supplying substances in that course, and prescribing in accordance with the Act (s 11(1)(b)-(c)). Visitors are also exempted for possessing substances as a result of care (s 11(2)). Suppliers who dispense or wholesale under authorisation from the order are exempted (s 11(3)(a)-(b)). The interaction with the Poisons Act is nuanced: the visiting professional’s capacity to prescribe restricted substances and drugs of addiction depends on express authorisation in the order (s 10(2)), and any such authorisation can only be given if the Minister is satisfied about adequate arrangements (s 10(3)). The Act also incorporates the Poisons Act definition of “supply” (s 3). The mandatory condition in section 9(4) ties the visiting professional’s permissible substances to what a local health professional could possess or supply under the Poisons Act - effectively importing Poisons Act limitations by reference.

Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985: Similar exemptions apply. A visiting professional does not commit an offence under this Act for possessing or supplying a substance in the course of authorised care (s 11(1)(b)), but the mandatory condition in section 9(4) requires them not to possess or supply any substance that a local health professional could not possess or supply under this Act. This means a visiting professional cannot, for example, possess a prohibited drug that a local doctor could not possess in the course of practice. The Act does not, however, allow a visiting professional to possess a drug of dependence in circumstances that would be an offence for any person; it only provides an exemption for authorised health care.

Health Care Complaints Act 1993: Section 12(1) bars complaints about visiting health professionals under this Act. This is a complete prohibition, not a suspension; even after the event, no complaint can be made about conduct that occurred while the exemption applied. This creates a permanent gap in accountability for that conduct. However, the bar only applies to visiting health professionals. If a visitor is also treated by a local registered practitioner, normal complaint pathways remain open for that treatment.

Interpretation Act 1987: The note to section 3 cross‑references the Interpretation Act, which contains standard definitions and provisions that affect the Act’s interpretation (e.g., gender, number, service of documents). No special interaction is spelled out.

Section 13 - Ministerial exclusion: The Minister may order that the Act (or a specified provision) does not apply to a specified person or class. This power can be used to adjust the interaction of the Act with other laws on a case‑by‑case basis, effectively allowing the Minister to re‑impose the usual regulatory framework on certain individuals or groups.

Review clause (s 17): The Minister was required to review the Act after five years from assent and table a report. The results of that review are not part of the Act, but the clause indicates that Parliament intended a regular check on whether the policy objectives remain valid. Failure to conduct the review does not invalidate the Act.

The Act has been amended seven times since its enactment, primarily to update cross‑references following changes to the health regulatory framework in NSW and to reflect the introduction of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) in 2010. The amendments are:

2003 No 40, Sch 1.17 - Amended sections 3 (definitions) and 9 (conditions). This appears to have been a minor update, likely to align definitions with the Poisons Act.

2003 No 45, Sch 2.5 - Amended section 3, probably to add or adjust a definition.

2006 No 59, Sch 7.6 - Amended section 3, again likely to update the Poisons List reference or the definition of health care services.

2009 No 61, Sch 4.3 - Amended section 3, updating references in light of the impending National Law.

2010 No 34, Sch 2.25 - A significant amendment that replaced references to the former Medical Practice Act 1992 and other registration laws with references to the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW). This amendment affected sections 9, 11, 12, and 14, bringing the Act into line with the single national registration scheme.

2010 No 54, Sch 2.25 - Amended section 3, likely to adjust the definition of “registration” or “health care services”.

2017 No 50, Sch 5.16 - Amended sections 3, 9, 11, 12, and 14. This appears to be a further update to cross‑references, possibly to reflect amendments to the National Law or the Poisons Act.

2019 No 1, Sch 1.7 - Amended section 3, likely a minor definitional update.

The substantive provisions of the Act - the exemption mechanism, conditions, and prescribing authority - have not been materially altered by these amendments. The changes are almost entirely mechanical, updating the names of Acts and definitions. Notably, the Act’s commencement provision (s 2) has never been amended; it still says the Act commences on a day or days to be appointed by proclamation. This raises the possibility that the Act may not have been proclaimed at all, or that it was proclaimed but the original commencement date is now historic. Practitioners should verify whether the Act is actually in force for a given period. The five‑year review under section 17 would have been due approximately in 2002 (assent was 1997), but the review’s outcome is not reflected in the Act.

There appears to be no reported case law interpreting this Act. A search of NSW case databases (up to the knowledge cutoff) reveals no appellate or trial decisions where the Act was central to the dispute. This is unsurprising given the Act’s narrow scope and the likely limited number of events declared under it. The Act was enacted in 1997, before the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games, and it is reasonable to infer that it was drafted specifically to facilitate that event. The lack of litigation may indicate either that the exemptions operated without significant dispute, or that any disputes were resolved privately or in foreign jurisdictions (since visiting professionals and visitors are non‑residents). The Act’s bar on complaints and disciplinary action may also have channelled any grievances away from tribunals that would publish reasons. The section 17 review report, if it exists, might contain discussion of operational issues but is not a judicial decision. For practical purposes, lawyers advising on a special event should assume no judicial guidance exists and rely on the plain text and the Minister’s discretion.

Commencement by proclamation. Section 2 provides that the Act commences on a day or days to be appointed by proclamation. If no proclamation has been made (or if the relevant proclamation has expired or been revoked), the Act may not be in force at all for a particular event. Do not assume the Act is operative. Check the NSW legislation website for the current commencement status.

Notice procedure is a precondition. A person is not a “visiting health professional” unless they have given notice of intention in accordance with the procedure specified in the order (s 7(c)). If the order specifies a particular form or method (e.g., notification via the event organiser), and the professional fails to follow it exactly, they receive no exemption. The Act does not allow for retrospective notice or cure.

Exemption period can be narrower than the event. The order must specify the exemption period, and it may be shorter than the actual event duration. Practitioners providing care outside those dates lose the exemption, even if the event is still ongoing.

Prescribing authority is not automatic. A visiting health professional cannot issue a prescription for a restricted substance or drug of addiction unless the order expressly authorises it (s 10(1)). The default is no authority. This is a critical trap for medical practitioners accustomed to prescribing internationally. Without the authorisation, any prescription is unlawful and the exemption under section 11(1)(c) does not apply.

The mandatory substance condition. Section 9(4) applies even if the order does not mention it. The visiting professional must not possess or supply any substance that an equivalent local health professional could not possess or supply. This may be stricter than the professional’s home country rules. The word “equivalent” introduces ambiguity: which local registration class is the comparator? The visiting dentist is compared to a local dentist, not a doctor. The visiting paramedic may not have an obvious equivalent in NSW if paramedics were not yet regulated under the National Law (depending on the date). This uncertainty creates legal risk.

No complaints or discipline, but criminal proceedings allowed. The bar on complaints and disciplinary action (s 12(1)) does not prevent criminal prosecution under the National Law for, say, fraudulently holding out as a specialist. It also does not affect civil liability. But it does mean there is no mechanism for the Health Care Complaints Commission to investigate or the National Board to impose conditions on a visiting professional’s practice. A rogue practitioner cannot be stopped mid‑event except by ministerial order under section 13 or by revocation of the special event declaration - neither of which is designed for rapid individual intervention.

Registered health practitioners are not protected. If a visiting health professional also holds Australian registration (e.g., a dual‑registered New Zealand doctor), the bar on complaints does not apply (s 12(2)). That professional can be the subject of a complaint and disciplinary action. This is an important nuance: the Act only protects professionals who are not already part of the Australian system.

Minister can exclude anyone. Under section 13, the Minister may by order declare that the Act (or a provision) does not apply to a specified person or class. This power can be used to strip a specific individual of their exemption for any reason or no reason, without a hearing or appeal. It is a broad executive power that undermines the certainty of the exemption.

No duty to treat. The Act authorises provision of services; it does not require it. A visiting professional who changes their mind or is ordered by their employer may decline to treat a visitor without breaching the Act.

Regulations can impose additional conditions. The Governor may make regulations that add conditions (s 9(3)) or create new offences (s 15(2)). These conditions may expand or restrict the exemption without amending the primary Act. Practitioners must check the current regulations as well as the order.

For event organisers (applicants for a special event):

1. Identify the event and argue that it will attract a significant number of overseas participants. Prepare a submission to the Minister.
2. Propose an exemption period that covers pre‑event training, the event, and post‑event care (s 5(4)). Ensure the period is wide enough to avoid professionals inadvertently falling outside it.
3. Propose a notice procedure that is practical and verifiable, such as an online form or a list submitted by the event organiser. The procedure must be specified in the order (s 5(5)).
4. If any visiting professional may need to prescribe restricted substances or drugs of addiction, include a request for specific authorisation under s 10(2). Provide evidence of “adequate arrangements” (s 10(3)), such as a designated pharmacy that will dispense only to visitors, a log system, and secure storage.
5. Once the order is made, communicate its terms to all visiting health professionals: the exemption period, the notice procedure, any conditions, and the authorisations (if any).
6. Ensure that visiting professionals actually give notice via the specified procedure before they start providing services. Keep records of notices.
7. Monitor compliance during the event. If a problem arises (e.g., a professional treating a spectator), the organiser should contact the Minister to seek an exclusion order under s 13 for that individual, or to vary the order.

For visiting health professionals:

1. Confirm that the event has been declared a special event under s 5 and that you are engaged to provide health care services to a visitor (s 7(b)).
2. Give notice of your intention to provide services, following the procedure exactly as specified in the order (s 7(c)). Retain proof of notice.
3. Verify the exemption period (s 8(2)(a)). Do not provide services outside those dates.
4. Read the order for any conditions imposed under s 9(1) and the regulations for any conditions under s 9(3). The most important mandatory condition is in s 9(4): do not possess or supply any substance that an equivalent local health professional could not.
5. If you intend to prescribe restricted substances or drugs of addiction, check whether the order authorises you to do so (s 10(1)). If not, do not prescribe these substances. If it does, comply with any conditions on that authorisation.
6. Only treat visitors for whom you are engaged (s 8(1)). Do not treat spectators, family members who are not visitors, or local residents.
7. Be aware that you are exempt from complaints and disciplinary action only if you are not a registered health practitioner under the National Law (s 12(2)). If you hold Australian registration, you remain subject to complaints.
8. Keep records of the services you provide, the substances you possess and supply, and any prescriptions you issue. The Act does not require this, but it will be essential to demonstrate that you acted within the authorised scope if a question arises.
9. Cease practice immediately if your exemption expires or the order is revoked. Do not assume a transitional period.

For pharmacists and suppliers:

1. Check that the order authorises you to supply on a visiting professional’s prescription or to supply by wholesale (s 10(2)). Without authorisation, you commit an offence under the Poisons Act.
2. Verify that the visiting professional is authorised to issue the prescription (look for the order’s authorisation under s 10(1)).
3. Ensure that you comply with all conditions of your own Poisons Act licence (s 11(3)(b)(iii)).
4. Supply only to visitors (not to the general public) if the authorisation is limited to that class.
5. Consider maintaining a separate log of supplies to visiting professionals, as the Minister may request evidence of the “adequate arrangements” condition.

For local health practitioners: Your practice is unaffected (s 14). However, you may wish to monitor the event order to see if it creates competition for your services. If you are concerned about patient safety, you have no standing to object to the order unless you fall within a class the Minister chooses to consult. Your only formal recourse would be to report a breach of the Act to the Minister or to the police if a criminal offence outside the exemption occurs.