The 2010s saw a decade of litigation concerning the trust imposed on solicitors holding money on client account and the circumstances when those solicitors will be liable for breach of trust when that money goes missing (usually because it is paid to an imposter). Some may have thought that the principles were sufficiently well established and clear as to render many such cases liable to summary judgment on the application of the claimant. In Social Money Limited v Atwells Solicitors LLP [2024] EWHC 3288 (Ch), Simon Wilton KC appeared for the successful solicitor-respondents to just such an application arguing that, on the facts of that case, the position was not so clear.
In this article Nicholas Pilsbury explores the lessons that other practitioners can draw from the decision and discusses why such cases may be complex than they might initially seem.
