Pharmacist Convicted of Dangerous Driving After Hit and Run Receives Warning but Deemed Fit to Practise

The registrant was convicted in Crown Court of two offences:

1. Causing serious injury by dangerous driving, and
2. Failing to stop after an accident, under the Road Traffic Act.

The incident occurred when the registrant overtook vehicles at speed, drove into the oncoming lane, and struck a pedestrian, causing life-changing injuries. He fled the scene, later abandoning the vehicle, and turned himself in after speaking to his father.

Details of the Incident and Conviction

The collision caused the victim to suffer:

• A fractured skull
• Bleeding on the brain
• Broken arm, elbow, and collarbone
• Collapsed lung
• Spinal fractures and nerve damage

The victim experienced long-term consequences, including pain, memory loss, and a diminished ability to work as an artist.

The judge described the registrant as:

“Fundamentally a very good person who has done a very bad thing.”

He imposed a 12-month immediate custodial sentence, reduced from 18 months for the early guilty plea, and an 18-month driving ban extended to 2 years due to time served.

Findings on Insight and Remediation

Despite the seriousness of the conviction, the GPhC panel found that the registrant had demonstrated significant insight and remediation, including:

• Participating in restorative justice and writing to the victim
• Undertaking a driving course voluntarily
• Fundraising for Brake, a road safety charity
• Working on the frontline during the Covid-19 pandemic, showing dedication and competence
• Gaining strong character references from colleagues and patients

A patient stated:

“He is one of the most caring, competent and thorough pharmacists I have been served by… extremely remorseful for what has happened.”

GPhC Determination on Impairment

While the registrant clearly breached Standard 6—requiring professional behaviour at all times—the panel decided that:

• His conduct had brought the profession into disrepute
• He had breached a fundamental principle of pharmacy practice
• However, he no longer posed a risk to the public, and had done all he could to atone for the offence

Quoting the determination:

“The Committee was unable to identify anything more that the Registrant could have done to repay his debt to society.”

Therefore, the panel concluded that the registrant’s fitness to practise is not currently impaired.

Sanction

Although the registrant was found fit to practise, the Committee issued a formal warning for breaching professional standards:

“It is right that this is marked by the imposition of a warning.”

The warning, recorded for one year, reminded the registrant:

“You must ensure that you comply scrupulously with the Standards in future.”

Key Learning Points for Pharmacy Professionals

1. Driving offences, especially those causing harm, can affect professional standing – Actions outside work can still damage public confidence.
2. Fleeing the scene of an accident is a serious ethical and legal breach – Even when followed by remorseful actions.
3. Insight and remediation can outweigh impairment – When fully demonstrated through concrete actions.
4. Warnings serve as regulatory censure without full restriction – They send a message that standards have been breached, even without suspension.
5. The public interest is broader than patient harm – It includes maintaining trust in the pharmacy profession as a whole.

Conclusion

This rare case shows that even where a pharmacist is imprisoned for a criminal offence, their fitness to practise may be upheld if they show deep insight, genuine remorse, and sustained rehabilitation. The GPhC panel acknowledged the seriousness of the offence but found that the registrant had done everything possible to earn back the profession’s trust—resulting in a formal warning rather than a suspension or erasure.