CAUSATION, REMOTENESS, AND FIDUCIARY GAINS
Abstract:The rule requiring fiduciaries to account for gains made in the course of their engagement is often strictly applied, but there are good reasons for thinking that in some circumstances the courts should relax their traditional severity, and there are cases in which they appear to have done this. If the courts decide in future cases that it would be appropriate to let defaulting fiduciaries keep gains made in breach of fiduciary duty, it would be desirable if they did not seek to produce this result by tinkering with the causation rules which govern claims in this area. Instead they should either take a narrow view of the scope of the fiduciary's engagement, so that the gains in question fall outside it, or else deem the gains to be too remote a consequence of the breach to justify ordering the fiduciary to turn them over.
Document Type: Research Article
Publication date: January 1, 2006
More about this publication?
- Until 2007 the King's Law Journal was known as the King's College Law Journal. It was established in 1990 as a legal periodical publishing scholarly and authoritative Articles, Notes and Reports on legal issues of current importance to both academic research and legal practice. It has a national and international readership, and publishes refereed contributions from authors across the United Kingdom, from continental Europe and further afield (particularly Commonwealth countries and USA). The journal includes a Reviews section containing critical notices of recently published books.