The claimant, who represented herself, told the court as she opened her case: "You can ask [hospital employee] later under cross-examination, you can ask her and she will tell you she is Jewish or not.
"I'm judge she is Jewish. She is a bloodline, her father is a Rabbi and I have no dispute with that."
The woman she was talking about sat in the witness box and was asked by Mr Justice Knowles whether she was Jewish. She replied she was, like her parents, Roman Catholic.
"I accept her evidence," Mr Justice Knowles wrote in his judgment.
He dismissed the claim for libel and breach of privacy, saying: "The Claimant's case is that she is the victim of a 'Jewish conspiracy' motivated (at least in part) by hatred of Muslims.
"She said that the sending of the email was an overt act in furtherance of this conspiracy. That is an extraordinary claim to make, to say the least. It is wholly unsupported by any evidence...
"Whatever the overall merits of the Claimant's libel and privacy claims, I completely reject her suggestion that she is the victim of any sort of conspiracy."
Dismissing the libel claim, he judged the hospital's email's suggestion that the claimant was "dishonest and fraudulent" was "substantially true", citing how she had repeatedly lied about her identity as she tried to obtain a statement from the A&E doctor.
