`This house believes that a rule of informed consent a better model than an absolute bar to regulate conflicts of interest.
I have three main points I would like to present to the house.
Firstly, a potential conflict could either be substantially risky conflicts or simple common representation which is remote and not likely to happen, so if the client knows of the expertise by the lawyer, and the conflict is remote, why would the lawyer personally bar acting for both thus putting the client at a disadvantage.
My second point is that a strong doctrine of loyalty would be difficult to operate in such a small jurisdiction, thus the doctrine of informed consent permits a solicitor to continue to act in a potential conflict under the law of fiduciary duty.
My final point is it is competent for solicitors to act for both the lender and the borrower in a conveyancing transaction, so informed consent further protects the lawyer.