Duncan Neil Gibbins & Matthew Roy Edmund Dean & Nicola Klimkowski

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

Three solicitor directors of Rehab4Life Ltd (trading as Lindsays) obtained over £3.1 million in litigation funding from the Axiom Fund under a Litigation Funding Agreement, but used the money for general practice funding/working capital rather than the 'Eligible Legal Expenses' permitted by the written agreement. The Tribunal rejected their claim that the LFA had been orally varied, finding the written contract was the entire agreement and that they knowingly signed a false and misleading contract containing terms they did not intend to keep, ignoring indicia that the investment manager might be acting fraudulently. Allegations 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5 (against the First Respondent) were found proved with express findings of dishonesty. Allegation 1.2 (misrepresentations about disciplinary history and ATE insurance) was proved as lack of integrity but dishonesty was not established, and the Principle 4 (client best interests) element of 1.1 was not proved. All three were struck off the Roll. Costs of £129,000 (comprising £35,000 investigation costs and £94,000 legal costs) were split equally, £43,000 each, payable individually and enforceable without leave.

Duties found breached:

• Non-discriminatory acceptance and cab-rank
• Handle inadvertently received material
• No improper use of client money
• Firm governance, systems and compliance
• Self-report to the regulator
• Report serious misconduct of others
• Honour professional undertakings

Aggravating factors:

• Proven dishonesty that was deliberate, calculated and repeated
• Misconduct continued over a significant period with intended further continuance (signing October documents)
• Breach of trust by misusing over £3 million of client money for own purposes
• Harm to the Axiom Fund and investors (losses in excess of £5 million, none repaid)
• Little insight into misconduct; failure to co-operate; no admissions

Mitigating factors:

• Previous unblemished record / no prior disciplinary findings
• Positive character references
• Not primarily motivated by personal gain (money used to grow the business)
• Possibly naive and too trusting of third parties later found dishonest (Schools, Barnett)