Solicitor fined £15k by tribunal for ‘threatening’ GP practices

A solicitor has been fined £15,000 by a disciplinary tribunal for ‘improperly threatening’ legal proceedings against a GP practice over Covid-19 vaccine exemptions.

Philip Julian Paul Hyland faced two allegations at the recent three-day hearing, all of which the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found proved, according to the Law Society Gazette.

Mr Hyland had been referred to the tribunal by the solicitor’s regulator after the BMA raised concerns about his behaviour, along with other solicitors who had also sent ‘threatening’ letters regarding Covid-19 vaccine exemptions. 

The BMA’s medico-legal committee told Pulse it is ‘pleased’ with the tribunal outcome, highlighting the ‘distress’ these threats caused GP practices.

In December 2021 Mr Hyland wrote to a GP practice to seek a Covid-19 vaccine exemption certificate allowing his client to travel without needing to self-isolate.

The allegations also related to his correspondence to the chair of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), in which he threatened legal proceedings over Covid-19 vaccines.

He called for withdrawal of vaccines, suspension of Covid testing and a live televised Christmas broadcast announcing the decision to do so.

According to the Law Society Gazette, who attended the tribunal, Mr Hyland believed that by writing the letters ‘he was protecting the health of people who risked harm from the vaccine’. 

The Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA), who referred Mr Hyland to the tribunal, argued that he had improperly threatened legal proceedings when there was no proper basis for the claims. 

In the case of the GP practice correspondence, the tribunal found that the language Mr Hyland used was ‘overbearing in its terms’ and that the submissions ‘were not properly arguable or in some cases not rooted in law’. 

Chair of the three-person panel Edward Nally said: ‘We found that the approach and the wording of the letter went beyond what would be considered to be acceptable. We did find that it was excessively legalistic.’

‘At the end of the day we believe it was a construct and not a genuinely proper exercise,’ he added.

The finding for the second allegation relating to the MHRA was based on similar arguments. 

While the full written judgement is not yet available, the Law Society Gazette reported that Mr Hyland was ordered to pay a £15,000 fine, as well as costs of £66,500 to the SRA.

In 2022, the BMA raised concerns that ‘a number of’ lawyers had been ‘threatening doctors with legal action’ if they did not provide vaccine exemptions for their clients. 

The union wrote to the solicitors’ regulator to raise this issue, and last year Pulse reported that after an investigation, one of these cases had been referred to the tribunal. 

Dr Simon Minkoff, chair of the BMA’s medico-legal committee, told Pulse that GPs worked ‘exceptionally hard’ during the Covid-19 pandemic, so receiving letters such as this ‘was no doubt incredibly distressing’.

He said: ‘It’s clear that GPs were issuing the Covid Vaccine Exemption Certificates according to the guidelines issued, and that they were unnecessarily and wrongly targeted for acting responsibly and professionally.’

Dr Minkoff confirmed that this recent tribunal case follows concerns the BMA raised to the SRA in February 2022, for which the union provided ‘examples of solicitors who threatened GPs with legal action’.

‘We hope the full written judgement provides clarity for GPs receiving similar letters and paves the way for handling future cases of a similar nature,’ he added.