David Buckle

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

The SRA alleged that Mr Buckle, a senior solicitor and partner at DMB Law, made and entered into a development proposal (the Second Development Proposal) with Mrs A, a long-standing client of the Firm, in circumstances involving an own interest conflict and taking advantage of a vulnerable client; that he continued to act for her while investing in/managing the development, loaning her money and buying a property for her to live in; and that he failed to ensure proper contractual documentation was in place (or alternatively took unfair advantage of her). The Tribunal dismissed all allegations. It found Mr Buckle's evidence honest and corroborated, accepting that he acted in his personal capacity as a financier (and as director of his companies RKB and DFB), not as a solicitor, in relation to the Second Development Proposal. Mrs A was not a client of the Firm in February 2014 for that proposal and was found not to be vulnerable, being described by witnesses as a 'formidable' figure who knew her own mind. Time recorded on the Firm's systems related to opportunity cost, not billable solicitor work, and no client invoice was raised. While Mr Buckle did periodic solicitor work for Mrs A during 2014-2020, the Tribunal found no own interest conflict or significant risk of one because his and Mrs A's interests were aligned. Although he failed to ensure appropriate contractual arrangements were in place for the Project, occupation of Property 2 and the Loans, this was found not to amount to professional misconduct as the lack of documentation was to Mrs A's benefit and his detriment. He did not take unfair advantage of her, having supported her financially throughout, and was the only party to suffer loss. The Tribunal ordered the Applicant to pay the Respondent's costs fixed at £50,000.