Registration Standards and Eligibility: The Five Pillars
The five registration standards
Every applicant and registered practitioner must meet five separate standards. Learn them as distinct obligations, because exam questions frequently test whether a candidate can identify which standard is engaged by a given fact pattern.
Continuing professional development (CPD) - practitioners must complete the CPD required for their registration type and keep evidence. The trap is confusing an annual CPD cycle with the registration year, or assuming CPD can be backfilled after a lapse.
English language skills - the standard is met through a defined pathway (qualifying qualification taught and assessed in English, or an approved English test, or extended practice in an English-speaking environment). Questions often present a practitioner who has worked overseas in English and expect you to recognise that only specified pathways count.
Criminal history - applicants must disclose all criminal history, including spent convictions in jurisdictions where they are not expunged, and any charges. The trap is the belief that a spent or minor offence need not be declared; non-disclosure is itself a serious matter.
Professional indemnity insurance (PII) - practitioners must hold PII covering all aspects of their practice. Students and non-practising registrants are generally exempt. The trap is assuming employer cover always suffices, or that cover can begin after practice starts.
Recency of practice - practitioners must have practised within the defined period. The trap is treating recency as satisfied by study or by non-clinical work.
Worked rule of thumb
When a scenario names a fact, ask: which standard does this fact belong to? A practitioner returning after three years away raises recency, not CPD; a practitioner who failed to declare a charge raises criminal history, not conduct. Answer the standard actually engaged, not the most dramatic one.
Exam traps to watch
- Confusing registration standards with the code of conduct; standards are eligibility requirements, the code is behavioural.
- Assuming a standard can be met retrospectively.
- Forgetting that standards apply on renewal, not just initial application.