Stephen Hooper

完整简历

Stephen is a Legal Director in the London office who qualified in 2008 and joined the firm in 2021.  His work covers a range of disciplines, with a particular focus on defending professionals involved in regulatory and disciplinary proceedings before bodies such as the GMC, GDC and NMC, as well as internal NHS Trust/PCT (now NHS England) disciplinary proceedings, university student disciplinary proceedings. He has been regularly ranked in both Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 for Professional Discipline. He is recognised as a “Rising Star” in the Legal 500 for Professional Discipline

Stephen’s criminal practice has seen him defend clients facing various allegations, ranging from sexual assault to fraud, gross negligence manslaughter and perverting the course of justice. He has frequently attended police and Counter-Fraud Squad interviews with clients, and has successfully defended clients in both Magistrates Court and Crown Court trials.

Throughout his career, Stephen has also maintained a broad practice in defending clinical negligence claims arising from a wide range of issues, from cancer misdiagnosis to catastrophic spinal injuries. This is in addition to having defended clients in a number of (predominantly sports-related) personal injury claims. 

相关经验

Professional Discipline and Regulation:

• Successfully defended an Associate Specialist in Emergency Medicine who was investigated by the GMC and appeared before a Medical Practitioners Tribunal in February 2021.  The doctor faced multiple allegations of misconduct in relation to six patients, but at the end of the hearing, many allegations were withdrawn, others found not proved, and the Tribunal concluded that the remaining matters did not amount to misconduct.  The case was closed with no further action.
• Represented a GP investigated by the GMC relating to treatment she provided to a child patient, who died of Addison’s disease in 2012.  The GMC investigation followed a crown court trial in 2016, at which the GP was acquitted of Gross Negligence Manslaughter.  Following a period of suspension, the GP was permitted to return to unrestricted practice in May 2020.
• Defended a dentist facing allegations relating to cosmetic treatment to the majority of the complainant’s teeth over a period of two days.  The GDC investigation followed a clinical negligence claim (in respect of which Stephen also represented the dentist).  At the eventual PCC hearing, the dentist’s fitness to practise was found not to be impaired.  

Inquests

• Represented a Consultant Paediatrician at an inquest into the death of a child patient, following an overdose of phenytoin

Medical malpractice

• Successfully defended a GP surgery at trial, in a claim brought by a former patient alleging a failure provide her with contraception, resulting in an unwanted pregnancy. After a 5-day trial, the Judge found for the Defendants – the GP practice and an individual doctor
• Defended a GP surgery accused of failing to diagnose/treat DVT in an elderly patient who went on to die of a pulmonary embolism.  Successfully defended the surgery at trial, with the judge finding all allegations in favour of the Defendants
• Defended a GP accused of negligently prescribing benzodiazepines to a patient over a number of years.  The Claimant was awarded damages at a lower level than the Part 36 offer made pre-trial, meaning a favourable costs order was secured for our client.  Also had success with the same matter at the Court of Appeal

Criminal defence

• Advising a GP under investigation for fraud, relating to multiple self-prescriptions of pain killers and antidepressants obtained by deception
• Defending a consultant gynaecologist in crown court proceedings, following allegations of sexual assault brought by multiple former patients
• Advising a junior doctor under investigation for possession and distribution of indecent images of children
• R v Rudling [2016] EWCA Crim 741 – successfully defended a GP charged with Manslaughter by Gross Negligence of a 12-year-old boy; and of perverting the course of justice.  The doctor was acquitted following a submission at the close of the prosecution case that there was no case to answer.  The Crown appealed the decision, but it was upheld by Leveson LJ