Well-known equestrian vet Timothy Brennan is to be suspended from the register of vets for two months after the High Court confirmed a recommendation by the Veterinary Council of Ireland.
Ms Justice Mary Irvine said, while she considered the length of the suspension was lenient, it was not unreasonable.
The suspension will begin on 20 December.
The Council sought the suspension arising from findings of professional misconduct against Mr Brennan.
The application arose from an inspection by Department of Agriculture officials at a horse trainer's yard on 9 February 2015 which identified bottes with deficient labelling and lacking serial numbers.
When Mr Brennan's vehicle was inspected, five bottles of unauthorised animal remedies were found and seized and Mr Brennan admitted in a later interview with officials he did not have records at his practice of the products seized.
Mr Brennan, of GSC Veterinary, Gowran Castle Stud, Gowran, Co Kilkenny, pleaded guilty in 2018 at Kilkenny District Court to three charges of having unauthorised animal medications and one of failing to keep records in respect of a named animal remedy.
A Fitness to Practice committee of the Council held an inquiry in October 2018 at which Mr Brennan made admissions of fact in relation to allegations against him of breaches of certain of the European Communities (Animal Remedies) Regulations 2007.
The committee found the allegations proven.
Last October, the council considered the committee's report and found the professional misconduct was extremely serious.
Having considered mitigating factors, it recommended a two-month suspension of Mr Brennan's registration.
Today Ms Justice Irvine said the council was wrong in law in treating as mitigating factors that there were "devastating personal tragedies" in Mr Brennan's life at the time of the misconduct and its view there would be no repeat of the misconduct.
Mr Brennan, as with all members of his profession, is obliged to practice according to the relevant professional standards, she said.
However she decided against returning the matter to the council for reconsideration.
While it is important to remind professionals whose conduct is liable to sanction that it is not the courts' role to just "rubber stamp" the decisions of their governing bodies, this is not a case for the court to impose a different sanction than that recommended, she said.
Her own view that the sanction was less stringent than it should have been was not a basis to set it aside, she said.
The sanction still makes clear the seriousness of the misconduct and points out the gravity of it to other members of the profession, she said.
