David Hugh Bartley

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

The Respondent, an assistant solicitor handling a clinical negligence case, provided inaccurate and misleading information to a solicitor at Hempsons over twelve telephone conversations between April 2005 and May 2007, falsely claiming he had instructed experts and counsel, arranged conferences and dictated letters. The Tribunal found the conduct was dishonest by objective standards but was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he subjectively realised his conduct was dishonest, so the Twinsectra combined test was not met; the conduct was found reckless rather than dishonest. It nonetheless breached Rule 1(a) and (d) of the Solicitors Practice Rules 1990. Given the seriousness, the Respondent was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £7,000 (reduced from £7,875.65 for the shorter hearing and his limited means).

Duties found breached:

• No improper communication with the court
• Integrity
• Good faith and courtesy to colleagues

Aggravating factors:

• Untrue statements continued over a period of more than two years across twelve telephone conversations
• Conduct undermined his own client's case
• Statements were admitted to be deliberate lies
• Extremely damaging to the reputation of the profession

Mitigating factors:

• No previous disciplinary sanctions
• Candid and not calculating in giving evidence; admitted his conduct was wrong
• Subject to significant work and domestic stresses, including the death of his father and family matters involving his stepson
• Firm lacked a supervisor and he was required to undertake unfamiliar litigation
• Deep regret and apology to the Tribunal, SRA and the other solicitor
• Did not intend to return to practice; practising certificate had lapsed

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["review_dishonesty_finding_cue_present"]