Mon12112017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

FIDUCIARY DUTIES: Staying virtuous

17 November 2017  

A recent Privy Council case indicates how the court will determine remedies and damages for breach of fiduciary duty. Joseph de Lacey explains

On 27 March 2017 the Privy Council (PC) gave judgment in Akita Holdings Ltd v The Honourable Attorney General of The Turks and Caicos Islands [2017]. The judgment and the decisions of the lower courts provide a useful summary of the principles to be applied when determining:

 

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Akita Holdings Ltd v The Honourable Attorney General of The Turks and Caicos Islands [2017] WTLR 407

    Arthur v Attorney General of the Turks & Caicos Islands [2012] UKPC 30

    Bray v Ford [1896] AC 44

    Chan v Zacharia [1984] HCA 36

    El Ajou v Dollar Land Holdings Ltd [1993] EWCA Civ 4

    Foskett v McKeown [2000] WTLR 667

    Goldcorp Exchange Ltd & ors v Liggett & ors [1994] UKPC 3

    Guinness plc v Saunders plc [1989] UKHL 2

    Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696

    Holder v Holder [1967] EWCA Civ 2

    Novoship (UK) Ltd v Nikitin [2014] WTLR 1521

    Phipps v Boardman [1964] 1 WLR 993

    Primeau v Granfield (1911) 184 F480

    Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1967] 1 All ER 378

    Rowley v Ginnever [1897] 2 Ch 503

    Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding [2007] WTLR 835