Lawyer Richard Barca fined for misconduct in dealings with several clients

Tribunal finds solicitor breached principle 6 in several client matters but avoids harsher sanction.

A solicitor has been fined after a disciplinary tribunal found he breached professional rules by exposing clients to conflicts of interest, though it stopped short of ruling his conduct dishonest or lacking integrity.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) heard allegations against Richard Gregory Barca, who was accused of multiple breaches of the SRA Code of Conduct 2011 and SRA Principles 2011.

At the start of proceedings, Barca made partial admissions. He acknowledged that in the case of Client P, he had breached Principle 6, which requires solicitors to behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in them and the provision of legal services. He denied all other allegations.

However, after hearing evidence, the tribunal found that Barca’s failings extended further. It concluded he had also breached Principle 6 in relation to Clients I and J.

The tribunal reviewed a series of cases in which Barca was alleged to have placed clients at risk of conflicts of interest:

• Clients A, B and C – Barca admitted there had been a “significant risk” of an own-client conflict in these matters, accepting this amounted to a breach of Principle 6.
  
• Clients K and M – Barca denied that these individuals were even his clients, but the tribunal disagreed. It found they were indeed clients, and that his involvement created a significant risk of conflict, again breaching Principle 6.
  

Despite these findings, the SDT dismissed more serious allegations. It ruled that Barca’s conduct had not been dishonest and did not amount to a lack of integrity under Principle 2. The panel rejected the SRA’s suggestion that his actions had been reckless.

In its decision, the tribunal distinguished between serious professional lapses and the highest forms of misconduct. While it accepted that Barca’s handling of multiple client matters fell below expected standards, it did not cross the threshold of dishonesty or moral failure.

The ruling carries weight for the profession. Principle 6 is fundamental to public confidence in solicitors. A breach of this principle demonstrates a failure to safeguard trust, even where no dishonesty is involved. The SDT made clear that by allowing circumstances to arise where client interests conflicted, Barca had undermined that trust.

The tribunal’s findings reflect a nuanced outcome. Barca’s admission in respect of some clients and denial in others highlighted the complexity of the allegations. The SDT carefully weighed evidence, noting that while Barca’s mistakes were significant, they did not warrant the most severe sanctions available.

Instead, the outcome was a financial penalty. The tribunal fined Barca, signalling its view that while his actions were serious, they were not irredeemable. The fine serves both as punishment and a warning to other solicitors to remain vigilant in avoiding conflicts of interest.

The case also underscores the importance of transparency in solicitor-client relationships. By failing to recognise or adequately manage risks of conflict, even without intent to deceive, solicitors can erode confidence in the legal system.

Barca now faces reputational damage as well as financial loss. Although he avoided suspension or being struck off, the tribunal’s findings will remain a matter of public record and a cautionary tale for the profession.