Undertaking to pay an expert's fee when the client has not put the firm in funds (Code 1.3)

Paragraph 1.3 of the Code requires a solicitor to perform all undertakings given by them, within an agreed timescale or, if none is agreed, within a reasonable time. Gareth gave an unqualified written undertaking to pay the engineer's fee within 30 days of receiving the report. The engineer relied on it and did the work. Nothing in the undertaking made payment depend on the client putting the firm in funds. The client's insolvency is therefore Gareth's commercial risk, not the engineer's. To protect himself he could have limited the undertaking (for example, 'subject to receiving funds from our client') or obtained the money first. Having given it unconditionally, he must pay within the agreed time. Failing to do so breaches para 1.3 and is likely also to engage Principle 2 (public trust and confidence) and Principle 5 (integrity). Because the undertaking was given on the firm's letterhead, the firm is also bound under para 1.3 of the Code of Conduct for Firms.

Why A is wrong: The undertaking is Gareth's own promise; it binds him regardless of who is ultimately liable for the fee.

Why B is wrong: Para 1.3 requires all undertakings to be performed; it contains no exception where the solicitor is not in funds.

Why C is wrong: Professional conduct liability on an undertaking does not depend on contractual consideration.

Why D is wrong: A solicitor cannot unilaterally withdraw from an undertaking once it has been given and relied on.