Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Suspended from practice — 6 months
The regulator’s term: suspension
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Isa Alalwani, doctor (General Medical Council 7707343).
Decision date: 12 February 2026 · Hearing started 9 February 2026 and ended 12 February 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Isa Alalwani's fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct after he sent two photographs of a patient with a large open leg wound from his personal mobile phone to a third party via WhatsApp on 14 July 2022. The images included patient identifiers and were sent for personal reasons. The tribunal ordered a six-month suspension with a review hearing and imposed an immediate order so the suspension takes effect at once. Dr Alalwani did not attend the hearing and provided no evidence of insight or remediation.
Charges
It was alleged that on 14 July 2022, while working as a clinical fellow and registrar in plastic surgery at North Bristol NHS Trust, Dr Alalwani inappropriately sent two images of a patient in a hospital bed with a large open leg wound from his personal mobile phone via WhatsApp to a third party. The images came to light when his phone was reviewed by Avon and Somerset Police during an unrelated investigation. The Tribunal found the allegation proved on the basis of the WhatsApp messages and supporting documentary evidence, and concluded that there was no clinical justification for sending the images, that the messages were sent for personal reasons, and that the images contained patient identifiers including date of birth, NHS number and hospital number, amounting to a breach of confidentiality.
Findings
The Tribunal found that the conduct breached paragraphs 20, 47, 50 and 65 of Good Medical Practice (2013) and engaged limbs (a), (b) and (c) of the Grant test. It assessed the misconduct as falling in the mid-range of the spectrum of seriousness, towards the upper end, taking into account the inclusion of patient identifiers, the reckless disregard for professional standards and the placing of personal interests ahead of the patient. Dr Alalwani did not attend, was not represented and provided no evidence of insight, remediation or context. The Tribunal found that he poses a current and ongoing medium-level risk to all three limbs of public protection and that his fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Single incident; no malicious intent; conduct not directed at the patient; no actual clinical harm to the patient.
Aggravating factors
Reckless disregard for professional standards; placing personal interests ahead of those of the patient; inclusion of patient identifiers (date of birth, NHS number, hospital number) creating a breach of confidentiality; complete lack of engagement with the regulatory process.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.