Lynden Wellesley

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

The attorney acted for a vendor in two rival, incompatible sale agreements for the same property. After collecting the Complainants' deposit and fee, he withdrew their agreement from the Stamp Office and pushed through registration of a transfer to a second set of purchasers without informing the Complainants, defeating their equitable interest and depriving them of specific performance. The Committee found him guilty of professional misconduct beyond reasonable doubt for breaches of Canons V(n), IV(q) and I(b). Although the decision referred to deception/being misled, it expressly found he was not pursuing personal gain and declined to strike off or suspend, instead imposing restitution, a fine and costs. No express finding of dishonesty was made.

Duties found breached:

• No conflict between current clients
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Conduct was deliberate and made it impossible for the Complainants (innocent third parties intending the home as their residence) to preserve their claim to the property
• He maintained silence and continued correspondence as though the Complainants' sale was proceeding, lulling them into a false sense of security
• He foresaw the likely harm to the Complainants yet proceeded
• Element of deception perpetrated on the Complainants

Mitigating factors:

• Attorney was at all times attempting to discharge his client's instructions and not pursuing any personal gain or advancement
• Misconduct stemmed from an overly blinkered view of his duties to his client rather than self-interest
• He had counselled the vendor and referred him to another attorney as to the consequences of breaching the contract