Partner suspended for sexual misconduct at firm retreat

---

SDT: Clear power imbalance

A former board-level partner at a well-known law firm has been suspended for nine months for making inappropriate sexual advances to a colleague at a partners’ away weekend.

Matthew James Machen Barker’s conduct occurred in 2012 but he has only recently been sanctioned because the Solicitors Regulation Authority was not aware of what happened until 2019.

Mr Barker, who is not currently working as a solicitor, did not engage with the proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), whose ruling has just been published.

He was a partner at Clarke Willmott for nine years to 2013 and at the time was on the firm’s management board.

The away weekend in June 2012 at the Hallmark Hotel in Gloucester was Person A’s first after being promoted the month before.

She reported that, after dinner, she started talking to Mr Barker, whom she had not met before.

“She stated that when she was starting to tell him about her background at the firm, he became aggressive [saying he ‘didn’t ask for her fucking CV’], and that this continued after she became disgruntled at his behaviour, with him telling her that he was on the management board.

“Person A stated that it seemed that [he] was on a power trip as he boasted about how he had made another newly promoted female partner cry earlier in the evening.”

In the early hours of the morning, Mr Barker said he wanted to apologise and offered to walk her back to her room “to show there were no hard feelings”.

“On arrival at the door to her hotel room, [he] asked for a glass of water, and Person A opened the door and went into the bathroom to get a glass of water. When she came out of the bathroom, she realised that the respondent had come into the room and sat on the bed.”

He refused to leave even though she told him that she had to go to sleep and stood by the door.

Person A recounted that Mr Barker asked if he could lie next to her all night, saying she would be safe and “proceeded to explain that his prick didn’t work”.

“[He] then asked for a hug and Person A said that, in an effort to persuade him to leave and to show that there were no hard feelings, she gave him a hug, but that he then started rubbing her back. Person A stated that she became irritated and that the respondent then tried to pull her towards the bed.”

In a note written two days later, after the firm became aware of what happened, she recalled that Mr Barker said he “would really like to fuck her”.

In a final effort to get him to leave, Person A suggested that they walk back to his room together. As they started walking down the corridor, she turned and walked quickly back to her room without him.

Soon after, Mr Barker texted Person A to say: “Needing a cuddle.”

At a meeting to discuss what happened, Mr Barker said he had made a fool of himself, was on medication and had acted out of character. He said that he was “filled with regret and monumentally apologetic”

He stated that his recollection of the evening was “patchy” and that he was unable to provide full details but was fully aware that his behaviour was unacceptable and not justifiable.

Mr Barker also accepted that “it might not be credible for him to stay on as a partner within the firm and volunteered to step down from his position on the board”, saying “he had inflicted this on himself and he deserves what is coming to him”.

When contacted by the SRA in 2020, he said he could not recall the details of the night but commented that “he does not recognise himself in how he is described, that he has never behaved as alleged and is not an aggressive man. He said that he would not have had a sexual mind-set, was married which he took very seriously”.

The SDT held that Mr Barker was in fact sexually motivated, had acted without integrity, and had damaged trust in the profession.

There was also a “clear power imbalance”. Saying he was on the management board was intended “to impart to Person A to indicate his superiority, authority and even power over her, when he spoke of having made another female partner cry earlier in the evening”.

Mitigating factors included that he had “promptly apologised unreservedly”, had stepped down from the board, the misconduct was “a single episode in a previously unblemished career”, and he had shown “genuine insight on the basis of the evidence”.

There was also “a number of factors” that had affected Mr Barker’s personal and professional life at the time, the details of which were redacted.

The SDT said a fixed-term suspension of nine months was the appropriate sanction and ordered Mr Barker to pay the SRA costs of £11,000.

Note: The original version of this article said Mr Barker left Clarke Willmott in 2019, as that was the date given in the SDT ruling. However, the firm has since confirmed that he left in 2013.