Breaking News: A professional conduct hearing has been told that a Kerry-based physiotherapist posted a fresh one-star Google review about a former patient’s business despite previously giving an undertaking not to repeat that behaviour. The latest development, heard before a Coru committee in Dublin, raises fresh questions about professional standards, online conduct and how regulated health professionals are expected to deal with disputes in public.
The case centres on Edmond O’Grady, a physiotherapist from Tralee, Co Kerry, and a complaint made by Donal O’Reilly of Bannside Osteopathy in Banbridge, Co Down. According to the hearing, O’Grady admitted posting another one-star review on Mr O’Reilly’s business page in August 2025 after an earlier inquiry in 2024 had accepted an undertaking from him not to repeat the conduct.
Breaking News Ireland: What happened at the Coru hearing?
The professional conduct committee heard that the new complaint relates to a one-star Google review posted between August 21 and August 29, 2025. Counsel for the Coru registrar said the review breached an undertaking given on December 18, 2024, during an earlier inquiry into related conduct.
Dr Shane McCarthy, chair of the committee, said the undertaking previously furnished had been breached. O’Grady, who represented himself at the hearing, admitted making the review and apologised for doing so.
He told the committee it was a foolish act carried out in a moment of frustration and said he needed to move on. He also indicated he was willing to give a further undertaking that it would not happen again.
For readers following Irish News, the key confirmed point is straightforward: the committee was told a regulated practitioner made a public online review about a complainant’s business after promising a previous inquiry he would not repeat that conduct.
Background to the dispute
The hearing was told the original dispute dates back to July 18, 2023, when Mr O’Reilly attended an appointment with O’Grady. According to submissions outlined to the committee, Mr O’Reilly later posted an unfavourable Google review about that appointment and set out concerns about how it had been conducted.
The committee heard that about a month after that review was posted, there was initially no online reply. Mr O’Reilly then said he received a number of missed calls from O’Grady. After that, O’Grady posted a poor review on Mr O’Reilly’s own business page for Bannside Osteopathy.
Mr O’Reilly alleged that the review was retaliatory and amounted to a personal attack on his character. That complaint led to the earlier 2024 inquiry, where O’Grady agreed to an undertaking not to repeat the conduct in question.
At that time, the earlier committee considered him unlikely to reoffend, noted that he had an unblemished record and accepted that he regretted the escalation of the complaint.
Why this Ireland News story matters
This Ireland News story goes beyond a disagreement between two individuals. It touches on a wider issue facing many professions: how personal disputes and online reviews can cross into regulatory territory when one of the parties is a licensed practitioner.
In regulated healthcare and social care settings, behaviour outside the treatment room can still become a professional conduct issue if it affects trust, confidence or standards expected by the regulator. Online reviews are now part of that landscape.
The case also highlights a practical point for professionals across Latest News Ireland and Irish Headlines: an undertaking given to a disciplinary body is not informal. It can carry serious weight, and any breach may lead to further scrutiny and possible sanctions.
Key facts from the hearing
- Edmond O’Grady is a physiotherapist based in Tralee, Co Kerry.
- The complainant is Donal O’Reilly of Bannside Osteopathy in Banbridge, Co Down.
- The original dispute arose after an appointment in July 2023.
- A prior inquiry in December 2024 accepted an undertaking from O’Grady not to repeat the conduct.
- A new complaint was made after a further one-star Google review in August 2025.
- The committee has yet to finalise its report and recommendations on sanction.
What Coru does and what happens next
Coru is the regulator for a range of health and social care professions in Ireland. Its role includes maintaining professional standards and considering complaints about registrants where fitness to practise may be at issue.
In this case, the committee will now prepare a report for the Coru council. That report will include recommendations on sanction, if any. No final sanction was announced during the hearing described in the evidence now in the public domain.
That means this remains an important News Updates story rather than a concluded disciplinary case. Readers searching for Breaking News Ireland or News Today should note the distinction: the admission was heard, but the final outcome still rests with the next stage of the Coru process.
Possible next steps in the process
- The committee completes its written report.
- The report is sent to the Coru council.
- The council considers any recommended sanction.
- A final regulatory outcome is then determined under the applicable process.
Official information heard by the committee
Counsel for the registrar said the August 2025 review was a breach of the undertaking given in 2024. O’Grady accepted he had given that earlier undertaking, though he also told the committee that until recently he did not understand that the result of the first inquiry was that no allegations against him had been found substantiated.
He apologised again at the latest hearing and said he was prepared to give a fresh undertaking. The committee heard Mr O’Reilly’s complaint that the continued reviewing activity amounted to an effort to pursue him.
As with many Irish Courts and Health News Ireland cases, the significance often lies not only in the initial complaint but in whether directions, warnings or undertakings were then complied with.
FAQ: What readers may want to know
Who is affected by this case?
The immediate parties are the physiotherapist, the complainant and the regulator. More broadly, it matters to healthcare professionals, patients and business owners who use public review platforms.
Was a final disciplinary sanction imposed?
Not at this stage based on the information heard. The committee is due to send its report and recommendations to the Coru council.
Why is this considered significant?
Because the new conduct was admitted after an earlier undertaking had been given to a professional conduct inquiry. That raises the seriousness of the matter from a regulatory perspective.
Does this change how online reviews are treated?
It underlines that online conduct can have professional consequences where regulated practitioners are involved, especially if the conduct appears retaliatory or breaches a prior commitment.
Latest Irish News takeaway
This Breaking News case is a reminder that disputes played out online can quickly become formal professional conduct matters when regulated healthcare workers are involved. The central issue now is not simply the one-star review itself, but the allegation, admitted at hearing, that it was posted after a clear undertaking not to do so.
For readers following Latest Irish News, Ireland Headlines and Irish News, the next key development will be the Coru council’s decision on sanction once it receives the committee’s report. Until then, the confirmed facts are that the review was admitted, an apology was made and the regulatory process remains ongoing.
