But she may have more to say to the Medical Council - responsible for registering doctors - which confirmed it sought further information from the defendant and the prosecuting agency whenever a doctor faced criminal charges.
It has the ability to place conditions on a doctor's practice, or to suspend them pending the outcome of the proceedings before the court, if it has reasonable grounds to believe that the alleged conduct casts doubt on the appropriateness of the doctor's conduct in their professional capacity.
According to the website there were no restrictions placed on the defendant's ability to practice at this stage.
It is alleged Gill claimed capitation payments, which are based on the number of patients enrolled with a primary health organisation (PHO).
Under the system, PHOs and their general practices are paid according to the number of people enrolled - not the number of times a provider sees patients.
A dispute between Gill and Auckland DHB, regarding the issue of such payments, reached the High Court in 2010.
It focused on about 300 to 400 patients of her 2000-strong roll, and whether they were entitled to funding.
If a doctor is convicted of an offence punishable by more than three years imprisonment there is a mandatory requirement for them to go before a professional conduct committee.
The committee may recommend the Medical Council:
• Reviews the doctor's competence
• Reviews the doctor's scope of practice
• Reviews the doctor's fitness to practise medicine
• Refers the subject matter of the investigation to the police
• Counsel the doctor
Alternatively the professional conduct committee may make one of the following decisions:
• To take no further steps on the conviction
• To bring a charge before the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal
Gill will next come before the court later this month.
