FBME Bank Ltd v Dangate Consulting Ltd [2018] EWHC 546 (Comm)
- New York Bar Formal Opinion 2024-1: Ethical Issues Arising from the Representation of Two or More Bidders Competing for the Same Asset
- Law Society Practice note – Conflict of interests (updated 27 July 2023)
- DC Bar – Ethics Opinion 383 – Disclosure of Client Confidences or Secrets in Compliance With the Outside Counsel Guidelines of Another Client; Advance Agreement to Withdraw from Representation in the Event of a “Midstream” Conflict
- Revolaze, L.L.C. v. Dentons US L.L.P., 2022-Ohio-1392
- Law Society Practice Note on Conflict of Interests – updated
- Al-Subaihi & Anor v Al-Sanea [2021] EWHC 2609 (Comm)
FBME Bank Ltd v Dangate Consulting Ltd [2018] EWHC 546 (Comm)
Defendants’ unsuccessful application for an order that the Second and Third Claimants’ solicitors cease acting due to an alleged conflict with the First Claimant. Unless the Court is given cogent evidence of a conflict, it should and does trust solicitors to police their own professional obligations. In any event, the Court does not have the means to look into privileged communications as the SRA would do if, after a full trial, the trial judge thought that there was something meriting the regulator’s attention. If any conflict did arise, though one was not found, on the facts it would have been historic, because the solicitors were no longer acting for the First Claimant.
Note: the Court of Appeal decision in Hood Sailmakers Ltd v The Berthon Boat Company Ltd (Independent, May 10, 1999) was not cited. See link here.
‹ Back to News