A solicitor with driving convictions who misled his new firm about his criminal record has been struck off the roll.

Nicholas James Bohun had been jailed for eight weeks in November 2020 after driving to work whilst still disqualified for a previous drink-driving conviction.

He failed to notify the Solicitors Regulation Authority of either of the offences, and compounded the issue when he joined his new firm, south Wales practice Rubin Lewis O’Brien. Asked if he was able to fulfil a contractual requirement to have a car and full insurance, Bohun told the firm he had re-applied for a driving licence but the DVLA was ‘taking ages’.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard that Bohun knew he was subject to a 24-month driving ban when he applied for the job and did not tell the firm about his convictions. He then told the SRA that he had been ‘completely upfront’ about his record and that the firm had done a full background check. He added in an email to the regulator to ‘please bear in mind it has taken me months to get new employment, so I am at your mercy to retain it’.

The tribunal found that Bohun, a solicitor since 2010, knowingly and deliberately made a misleading statement to the firm as he knew he had not re-applied for his licence. Knowing he had not been honest with the firm, he then made another misleading statement to his regulator.

The tribunal added: ‘Mr Bohun’s conduct was deliberate and repeated. He had sought to conceal his failure to disclose his convictions and the ongoing SRA investigation by making inaccurate and misleading statements… [he] failed to conduct himself with the standards of probity and integrity expected of a solicitor.’

Bohun had first been convicted – whilst a non-practising solicitor – of driving a motor vehicle in 2020 with excess alcohol in his blood. His conviction was disclosed to the SRA only following a report from South Wales Police.

He then found work as a paralegal but was convicted of driving whilst disqualified and without insurance. 

Bohun was struck off and ordered to pay £6,173 costs.

Topics