What is the legal test for proximity between a solicitor and a third party?

Clearly the facts in Tracy v. Atkins concern a degree of contact and proximity between the solicitor and the third party that reaches or is the high water mark of proximity in the absence of a solicitor/client retainer. The facts before me bear no resemblance to those in Tracy v. Atkins. On the facts before me there is no communication of any reliance by the plaintiff on the defendants to hold the share purchase funds pending delivery of a share certificate and I find that there was no such reliance in fact. There were no representations, no advice, and apart from the single conversation referred to above, no contact. On the facts before me, I am not able to find that there was a proximity of relationship. I find that the plaintiff knew that he was dealing with the agent of Pear, and that delivery of the share purchase money to the defendants was delivery of the funds to Pear.