Michael Van Thanh Quach, now living in Canberra, had his registration cancelled by NSW authorities in 2015 following a series of complaints about his conduct.

In the latest twist to the legal saga, Dr Quach has unsuccessfully appealed to the ACT Supreme Court for a personal protection order against the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission.

Dr Quach told the ACT Supreme Court that attempts by regulators to investigate and prosecute him amounted to harassment.

But the court found that Dr Quach's reasons for the order were "scurrilous", "unfounded" and "nonsensical".

Between 2007 and 2012 Dr Quach worked as a general practitioner in the ACT and Sydney.

In 2011, NSW authorities prosecuted him in relation to his treatment of a delirious patient.

Rather than sending the patient to hospital for psychiatric assessment, Dr Quach offered to observe the patient's condition by taking the patient and their friends out to dinner.

Another complaint related to included diagnosing a vomiting 20-year-old woman with a middle-ear infection before sending her for a pregnancy test, even though she assured him she was a virgin.

Individuals who seek personal protection orders, which are similar to domestic violence orders, typically have their identities protected by the courts.

But in the context of Dr Quach's long-running legal manoeuvres, the ACT Supreme Court found this month there was a public interest in identifying him.

"In short, [Dr Quach] has, in his continuing dispute with the HCCC, used an enormous amount of public resources, both the resources of the NSW and ACT courts," Justice Hilary Penfold concluded.

"In these circumstances, it seems to me that the appellant's substantial use of the court system in this jurisdiction should not be obscured from other courts, and from other targets of the appellant's litigious inclinations, by a provision designed to protect individuals involved in legal proceedings that routinely arise out of troubled personal relationships."

Dr Quach's attempts to reinstate his medical registration were thrown out of the NSW Court of Appeal in July, with the court branding his behaviour vexatious and an abuse of process.

His litigation had rattled around the court for nearly two years before this decision, as he has variously sought to nullify the cancellation of his registration, to disqualify certain judges from hearing his case and to ban the court's registrar from hearing the matters.

Previous investigations into Dr Quach's practice found he "dramatically over-investigated" patients' symptoms and provided "unusually extensive medical treatment" such as giving intravenous and intramuscular antibiotics and fluids.

He diagnosed a large number of patients with asthma despite them having no history of the condition and he audio recorded consultations, telling supervisors it was because patients "complained about him without cause".

Following misconduct hearings in 2015, authorities concluded that a narcissistic personality disorder could explain Dr Quach's behaviour.

Dr Quach met the criteria for narcissistic personality disorder because of his grandiose sense of self-importance, exploitation of patients, lack of empathy and arrogant and haughty behaviour, an expert psychiatrist told the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

"The respondent is detrimentally affected and likely to be detrimentally affected in the practice of medicine by reason of his narcissistic personality disorder," the tribunal found.

"His ability to practice medicine has been severely compromised, weakened and damaged because of the impact of his narcissistic personality disorder."