DAVID GEORGE FLEMING

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

David George Fleming acted for a client whose late husband had left an informal (unwitnessed) will. On his client's instructions he conducted settlement negotiations with the siblings' solicitor referring to the document as a 'will' and obtained a covenant barring the siblings from challenging the estate, while concealing that the will was informal and that the covenant would be used to dispense with the siblings' required consent to probate. The Tribunal found he made representations that were, to his knowledge, misleading, and expressly found his conduct dishonest and unfair, breaching r 3.1 and amounting to unprofessional conduct. Acting on client instructions was no defence. He was fined $7,500 and ordered to pay $25,224 in costs.

Duties found breached:

• No taking unfair advantage
• Good faith and courtesy to colleagues

Aggravating factors:

• Practitioner was the moving force in creating and sustaining the other side's misconception over several months
• When given the opportunity (request to annex the will to the deed) he put forward unconvincing reasons to avoid disclosure and continued the misleading conduct
• Conduct pursued to obtain a material advantage for the client (obtaining a covenant barring the siblings' rights)

Mitigating factors:

• Practitioner acted on his client's express instructions not to disclose the informal nature of the will
• Practitioner genuinely believed the informal will would be admitted to probate
• He gave evidence, accepted by the Tribunal, that but for his client's instructions he would have described it as an informal will

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["unverified_costs_amount=25224"]