Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

How I fought the Daily Mail - and won

Dr Jose Antonio Serrano on his legal battle against the newspaper

For the last two and a half years, I have been involved in a libel action against the Daily Mail.

They published an article in April of 2012 which condemned me as ‘a foreign doctor’ who had subjected a bus driver patient to ‘a year of hell’ by having his driving licence taken away for no good reason.

I felt that launching a legal action against the paper was the only way to prove my innocence. Cases like mine can cost several millions of pounds, and if I lost I could lose my home and might have to emigrate, so I felt scared of the consequences for me and my family (my wife was expecting yet another baby at the time).

But I decided to risk it.

I first met the patient involved in January 2011 when he attended the surgery complaining of acute foot pain.

In the subsequent article published in the Daily Mail, a columnist alleged that I almost immediately diagnosed gout and without any investigation, tests or supporting evidence, misdiagnosed the patient as alcohol dependent and reported him to the DVLA. They stated that the patient had told me he might drink a pint or two after work and if he went out with his wife and friends at the weekend a couple of spirits, but that I had misunderstood him because of the ‘language barrier’.

I felt like the whole article was a gross misreprentation of the consultation and failed to establish how hard I had tried to help my patient and prevent a tragedy. The comments in the paper upset me and undermined my confidence.

In the aftermath of the publication of this article I struggled to look after patients with similar issues, as they would often bring the article up when talking about their problem. That made me paranoid thinking that all my patients thought I had a ‘pet hate’ for alcohol issues, which I did not.

In fact, as the court found, there had been no language barrier and no misunderstanding and I had been fully justified in reporting the patient to the DVLA. Evidence in the patient’s medical records showed that he had declared consuming serious amounts of alcohol on a regular basis since at least 2006. My diagnosis of gout was correct and a later scan showed a fatty liver. Further, the court found that I had made every reasonable effort to get the patient to engage and confront his alcohol problems but that, as he was in denial, he had rejected my efforts to assist.

When I was first contacted by the Daily Mail, on the day before the article was published, I was at pains to point out that, whilst I would like to comment, I was unable to do so without the patient’s consent. Then they provided me with a note from the patient stating that I had ‘authorisation to speak’ to the Daily Mail. I did not consider that this constituted a proper consent to disclose the patient’s records. The article accused me of being evasive and of hiding behind patient confidentiality. The court agreed that this form of consent did not permit me to disclose any medical information.

After the article was published, I first sought redress from the Daily Mail through the Medical Protection Society and then through the Press Complaints Commission. The paper refused to take my complaint seriously and months went by with my getting nowhere, so I took them to court.

My belief that I had acted properly was fully vindicated by the judge, who found in my favour on all counts. I was awarded substantial damages and my costs. I feel completely vindicated - the only way I can describe it is as if the whole thing had never happened.

After the court delivered its verdict, my solicitor Daniel Taylor told them: ‘Dr Serrano has today been fully vindicated by the court. It is a tribute to his courage that he never wavered in pursuing his action even though the newspaper pursued completely unfounded defences of truth and fair comment to the bitter end.

‘The right to a reputation is a vital human right, every bit as important as freedom of speech and a free press. It is right that doctors and other dedicated professionals should know that where they have been subject to untrue and unjustified allegations by a tabloid or any other publication, the law is there to protect them.’

My message to the profession, which often feels under siege by the press as a result of the constant stream of negative and often untrue articles, is that you can obtain redress, and the truth will out.

Dr Jose Antonio Serrano is a GP in Bexhill, Sussex.

Rate this article  (4.82 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (37)

  • Bob Hodges

    Well done Dr Serrano!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Good man.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    As I always said , those with no virtue holding high position in a hierarchy , spread evils through the most . This is a government which uses the tactics of bullying :
    ''The Conservative Party has issued a voluntary code of conduct to all its MPs telling them not to "bully, abuse or harass" their employees.''
    11/4/2014. BBC news
    No wonder the evils are spread via its propaganda media .
    There are fundamental principles why the judicial system in western democracy must be independent and not to be influenced by those with legislative or executive powers. Hence , everyone should respect the final verdict.
    For Dr Serrano , it is about audacity to defend what you believe . Freedom to believe and freedom from fear( as Franklin Roosevelt said). Well done.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well done.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well done ! I am so pleased for you, your family, your colleagues and your patients. Your win over the current media frenzy of creating negative stereotypes of our Professions, fuelled by a Government rhetoric is a great personal and Professional victory. I salute your strength of character?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • That should read I salute your strength of character !! Sorry

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'll happily pay into a common fund to take on the media.The medical defence unions should be doing all this on our behalf anyway but unfortunately they all too often take a defensive,risk averse,cost saving approach.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Admire your guts and think it is a good example to follow for a profession that is scared of its own shadow.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Braver than I would have been in the same position, well done and restores some faith in Justice!

    I must say one newspaper (the one in the article) stands out head and shoulders above any others in derogatory, biased, unfounded and anti-GP articles, that in itself is proof there is no 'fair comment' involved.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A true hero in an age of so many false ones.

    We're already raised several glasses to you

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say