Fiduciary Duty CASES
In English law, a fiduciary duty is a duty of loyalty and good faith owed by someone in a position of trust to another party. It requires the fiduciary to act solely in the beneficiary’s interests, avoiding conflicts and unauthorised gains.
Definition and Principles
Fiduciary duties arise in relationships of trust and confidence, such as trustee and beneficiary, company director and company, or solicitor and client. Equity imposes strict obligations to prevent abuse of power and protect vulnerable parties.
Requirements for Establishing
- Relationship of trust: The fiduciary undertakes to act for or on behalf of another.
- Duty of loyalty: The fiduciary must not place personal interests above the beneficiary’s.
- No profit rule: Any unauthorised profit made in the course of the relationship belongs to the beneficiary.
- No conflict rule: Fiduciaries must avoid conflicts between duty and personal interest.
Practical Applications
Classic cases include Bristol and West Building Society v Mothew (1998), defining fiduciary obligations, and Boardman v Phipps (1967), where a fiduciary had to account for profits gained despite acting in good faith.
Importance
Fiduciary duties safeguard integrity in relationships of trust, ensuring that those with power act in the best interests of others. They remain central to equity, company law, and professional regulation.
Home » Fiduciary Duty
Franbar Holdings Ltd, a 25% shareholder in Medicentres, sought permission to continue a derivative claim against directors Patel and du Plessis for alleged breaches of duty including diversion of business opportunities. The court refused permission, finding Franbar had adequate alternative remedies through its existing unfair prejudice petition and shareholders' action....
Mr Bryant resigned as director after being effectively forced out by his co-director Mr Foster. During his notice period, a major client offered Mr Bryant future work through his own company. The Court of Appeal held there was no breach of fiduciary duty as his resignation was innocent, he did...
UPMS, a member of an LLP which wholly owned Fort Gilkicker Ltd, sought permission to bring a double derivative action against a director who allegedly misappropriated a business opportunity. The court held that multiple derivative actions survived the Companies Act 2006 and granted permission to continue the claim. Facts Universal...
Mr Simonet, managing director of CMS Dolphin Ltd, resigned and diverted clients Argos, Reebok and DFB to his new venture with Mr Patterson. The court held he breached fiduciary duties by appropriating maturing business opportunities and was accountable for profits, even though profits were made through a corporate vehicle. Facts...
A railway company's director, Thomas Blaikie, contracted on behalf of the company with his own firm for iron chairs. The House of Lords held that directors cannot enter contracts with companies they serve, as fiduciary duties prohibit conflicts between personal interest and duty to the company. Facts Thomas Blaikie was...
Three customers claimed that commissions paid by finance lenders to motor dealers for arranging hire purchase agreements constituted bribes or breaches of fiduciary duty. The Supreme Court held that dealers in typical tripartite car finance transactions do not owe fiduciary duties to customers, dismissing the bribery and equity claims, but...
The appellants, former fiduciaries of the respondents, exploited a business opportunity obtained through their fiduciary positions to provide recovery services after resigning. The Supreme Court upheld the requirement to account for all profits made, rejecting arguments that a 'but for' causation test should apply to reduce accountability. The case affirms...
An elderly farmer charged his only asset, Yew Tree Farm, to secure his son's company debts after the bank manager visited without suggesting independent advice. The Court of Appeal set aside the guarantee and charge on grounds of undue influence, establishing that banks owe fiduciary duties when crossing from routine...
The appellant agreed to lease a salmon fishery from respondents, believing they owned it. In fact, the fishery belonged to the appellant himself under earlier settlements. The House of Lords held the agreement should be set aside for common mistake, but subject to the appellant compensating the respondents for improvements...