Under SRACC 2011, a lawyer may act for both the client and the lender in a property transaction if there is a substantially common interest and the client's consent. Which condition is part of the exception?

• A. It must involve any type of property transaction regardless of residence.
• B. The client consent is not required.
• C. The exception applies only if the property is used as the buyers' private residence and the certificate of title is in the SRA/UK Finance approved form, and the lawyer considers it reasonable and in the clients' best interests.
• D. The lawyer must never act for both parties even with consent.

Answer: (C)

Dual representation in property transactions is normally avoided because of potential conflicts, but an exception exists when there is a substantially common interest and the client consents. The specific condition that makes this exception work is that the purchase is for the buyer’s private residence, the certificate of title is in the SRA/UK Finance approved form, and the lawyer has formed the view that allowing the dual act is reasonable and in the clients’ best interests. This framework limits the risk by tying the exception to owner-occupier transactions, using a standardised title form to reduce ambiguity, and placing a professional judgment check on whether it’s appropriate. The other scenarios don’t fit because consent alone isn’t enough, and the exception isn’t available for all property transactions or when the form isn’t the approved one.