An associate at an international law firm who faked a cancer diagnosis and submitted forged medical evidence to his employer has been struck off by a disciplinary tribunal.
A former Reed Smith associate has been struck off the roll after a disciplinary tribunal found he repeatedly lied to his employer about having cancer and submitted a falsified medical report to back his deception.
Soham Nitin Panchamiya, admitted as a lawyer in 2017 and formerly based in the international law firm’s Budapest office, was barred from practising law by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) after it found his conduct to be “deliberate, calculated and repeated”.
The tribunal heard that between September 2023, Panchamiya falsely told Reed Smith that his cancer had returned and that he was “not handling it very well”, requesting a week of annual leave to attend appointments and claiming he was unable to focus on his work during that period.
Once his leave was approved, Panchamiya escalated the deception, claiming he would be admitted for surgery the next day and telling his employer, “third time’s the charm!”
In a series of emails and conversations with the firm’s HR manager a month later, he claimed he was now clear of spine cancer and said he was receiving preventive chemotherapy.
In response, the firm sought medical information to comply with local employment laws, which Panchamiya initially resisted providing, before eventually submitting a medical report several weeks later.
The report, reportedly signed by an oncologist, detailed the alleged surgery, referenced a history of early-stage cancer, and stated that Panchamiya was healthy and fit to work, with his blood tests and ultrasound showing no immediate health risks.
However, the firm identified inconsistencies in the document, including spelling errors, formatting irregularities and discrepancies in the doctor’s name and licence number.
When contacted directly, the doctor named on the report denied authoring or signing it and described the document as a forgery.
During an internal meeting, Panchamiya admitted he had made a “big mistake” and agreed to see a doctor chosen by the firm, which caused the firm to promptly suspend him afterwards.
Before the tribunal, Panchamiya admitted the allegations that he falsely claimed to have been diagnosed with cancer and submitted a falsified medical report, acknowledging that his conduct was dishonest.
He argued that exceptional circumstances applied, citing mental health struggles, grief following his father’s death, and significant personal and financial pressures at the time.
However, while the tribunal expressed sympathy for his situation, it rejected this argument, concluding that these factors did not explain or excuse his conduct and did not amount to exceptional circumstances.
The tribunal stated that Panchamiya’s actions were “individually serious, and cumulatively extremely serious”, noting that he had “abused the trust placed in him by the firm”.
Panchamiya was, as a result, struck off and was ordered to pay £22,000 (AU$43,500) in costs.
