Fiduciary Duties: Staying virtuous

A recent Privy Council case indicates how the court will determine remedies and damages for breach of fiduciary duty. Joseph de Lacey explains ‘The case shows the flexibility of the concept of constructive trusts, and how they can be and are used to protect those to whom fiduciary duties are owed.’ On 27 March 2017 …
This post is only available to members.

Haastrup v Okorie [2016] EWHC 12 (Ch)

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | June 2016 #160

This was an application to strike out, or alternatively, for summary judgment in relation to, a claim in relation to the estate of Captain Haastrup brought by the claimant.

Captain Haastrup died on 8 October 2012 in England. On 20 January 2014, the claimant obtained letters of administration in Nigeria. On 20 June 2014, these letters were resealed in Leeds District Probate Registry. It subsequently emerged that the claimant had been injuncted by the Nigerian court to restrain him from relying on the letters of administration or from ‘parading himself as in any way as the administr...

FHR European Ventures LLP & ors v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [2014] UKSC 45

Wills & Trusts Law Reports | September 2014 #142

The claimants engaged Cedar Capital Partners LLC (Cedar) to act as their agent in negotiating the purchase by FHR European Ventures LLP of the issued share capital of Monte Carlo Grand Hotel SAM (which owned a long leasehold interest in the Monte Carlo Grand Hotel) from Monte Carlo Grand Hotel Ltd (vendor). As such an agent, Cedar owed a fiduciary duty to the claimants, notwithstanding which it entered into an exclusive brokerage agreement with the vendor to provide for the payment of a €10m fee following completion – the vendor was paid €211.5m when the purchase was completed on 2...

Fiduciary Duties: Rigour at all times

Pennyfeathers underscores the stringency of directors’ duties and indicates when the court will lift the corporate veil to provide a remedy for breach. Nicholas Broomfield explains ‘Lord Sumption had affirmed a limited power of the court to pierce the corporate veil in circumstances where a party was abusing corporate personality to evade their obligations.’ The …
This post is only available to members.