Andrew Foote, president of the National Association of Specialist Gynaecologists and Obstetricians, has had two complaints hanging over him since 2004 and 2006.

They relate to his medical treatment of two women, Susan Virginia Dixon and Patricia Dickson, in late 2004 and 2005.

The complaints led to the respected doctor coming under the scrutiny of the Medical Board of Australia, who investigated and formed professional standards panels to explore the allegations.

In 2010, six years after the first complaint was laid, lawyers for Dr Foote headed to the ACT Supreme Court seeking a stay of the professional standards hearings. They argued the delay breached their client's right to a trial without unreasonable delay - a right enshrined in the territory's human rights laws.

It is an argument increasingly used in criminal cases, where the backlog in the Supreme Court has left accused people waiting years for their day in court.

''It must be accepted that the matters into which the [standards panels] propose inquiring are not, on their face, trivial,'' Justice John Burns wrote in his judgment.

''On the contrary, they involve questions the answers to which may be relevant to a determination whether Dr Foote has demonstrated appropriate competence in his field of practice.

''This may, in turn, raise questions about his competence to practice generally, or to conduct particular types of procedures.''

But the judge noted it wasn't his role to call evidence from both sides' expert witnesses and determine the issues at stake.

Those inquiries remain before the medical board, which put the brakes on the cases until the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings.

Dr Foote's lawyers criticised the length of time the board took between receiving notice of the allegations and convening a panel.

In relation to Ms Dixon, who first made the complaint in late 2004, a professional standards panel didn't conduct a hearing until June 2008. It soon collapsed after the panel ruled it had no jurisdiction to inquire into Ms Dixon's complaint, but the board remained determined to explore the allegations.

In March 2010 a new panel had been formed but before the hearing could begin Dr Foote's lawyers went to the Supreme Court.

The second woman, Ms Dickson, raised the allegation in May 2006 but the decision to link the complaint to that of Ms Dixon wasn't made until late 2008.

Justice Burns this week ruled Dr Foote and his legal team where to blame for much of any delays after June 2008.

The judge also noted the Medical Board of Australia had an investigatory role, and the time it took to bring the cases before a panel was ''inevitable''.

''It is simply a function of the nature of the complaints, and the necessity to investigate them thoroughly,'' he wrote.

Justice Burns said the delay ruled the delay was not unreasonable in the circumstances, and said he was satisfied Dr Foote could still get a fair hearing.