The operation of the remedies for breach of the equitable duty of confidence are confused, largely because of a recent tendency to treat the action as a tort, with a consequent lack of emphasis of the equitable origins of the action for breach of confidence. This paper places the action and the available remedies in its equitable context. It surveys the operation of the pecuniary remedies which are available, with particular reference to negotiating damages and breach of confidence. Principles are identified to determine when each remedy should be available, including two fundamental principles of but for causation and conscience. The paper also considers whether profits made from breach of confidence should be held on constructive trust. Whilst it is argued that it is now time to recognise a principled remedial constructive trust in English law, the role of such a trust as a remedy for breach of confidence is likely to be very limited.

The book provides a succinct, clear and accessible explanation of key theories and terminology in equitable and trust law and demonstrates how these are applied in practice with simple, topical examples. Bryan from University Melbourne, Vann from Monash.

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.

The law of commercial remedies raises a number of important doctrinal, theoretical and practical controversies which deserve sustained and rigorous examination. This volume explores such controversies and suggests solutions, which is essential to ensure that the law is defensible, clear and just. With contributions from twenty-three leading academic and practitioner experts, this book addresses significant issues in the law which, taken together, range across the entire remedial jurisdiction as it applies to commercial disputes. The book primarily focuses on the resolution of controversies in the English law of commercial remedies, but recent developments elsewhere are also considered, especially in other common law jurisdictions. The result provides remarkably comprehensive coverage of the field which will be of relevance to academics, students, judges and practitioners.

Disgorgement of profits is not exactly a household word in private law. Particularly in civil law jurisdictions – as opposed to those of the common law – the notion is not well known. What does it stand for? It is best illustrated by examples. One of the best known being the British case of Blake v Attorney General, [2001] 1 AC 268. In which a double spy had been imprisoned by the UK government before escaping and settling in the former Soviet Union. While there wrote a book on his experiences, upon which the UK government claimed the proceeds of the book. The House of Lords, as it then was, allowed the claim on the basis of Blake’s breach of his employment contract. Other examples are the infringement of intellectual property rights, where the damages of the owner are limited, but the profits of the wrongdoer immense. In such cases, the question arises whether the infringing party should be disgorged of his profits. This volume aims at establishing the notion of disgorgement of profits as a keyword in the discourse of private law. It does not purport to answer the question whether or not such damages should or should not be awarded. It does however aim to contribute to the discussion, the arguments in favour and against, and the organisation of the various actions.

This volume brings together three separate works written by Paul Finn over nearly 40 years. The first, Fiduciary Obligations, was published in 1977. It has been out of print for many years, though it is still widely cited both in judicial decisions in common law countries and in international scholarship on fiduciary law. It has been regarded widely as a 'seminal' or 'classic' piece. Its publication preceded two important developments. The first was the High Court of Australia's systematic reappraisal of equity jurisprudence in the 1980s. This contributed significantly to the shaping and future direction of modern fiduciary law in Australia. The second was the growth in civil litigation in common law countries against banks, advisers in many guises, commercial 'agents', franchisees, joint venturers and other commercial actors which raised issues as to the extent to which, if at all, functions they performed for customers, etc, could attract strict fiduciary standards of conduct or merely those lesser standards otherwise imposed by the common law or equity.These two developments inform the second work in the volume, "The Fiduciary Principle", which was published in Canada in 1989, but is relatively unknown in Australia. Though its scope was limited designedly to those standards of conduct the fiduciary principle imposed on private law fiduciaries, it indicated when, and to what extent, a person or body would be a 'fiduciary' for the purposes of those standards. It accepted that, while 'fiduciary' could not be defined, it could be described. That description, founded on a 'legitimate expectation' test, is commonly used both in Australia and elsewhere.The third piece, "Fiduciary Reflections" was published in 2014 and contains the author's personal reflections on the course of Australian fiduciary law since the publication of Fiduciary Obligations. It suggests that, despite the clear signposts for the future development of fiduciary law given by the High Court in the 1980s, recent decisions of subordinate Australian courts seem to be heading, unnecessarily, in the opposite direction. Now at risk are the coherence of fiduciary law and its rationale.* Click here for information on our title Finn's Law: An Australian Justice edited by Tim Bonyhady.From the Book Launch Fiduciary Obligations and Finn's Law, address by The Hon Keith Mason AC QC, 9 February 2017..."Fiduciary Obligations comes with a modern Introductory Comment by Paul himself, a Preface by Sir Anthony Mason, and the reproduction of two of Paul's many extra-judicial contributions on the topic. These are an article on The Fiduciary Principle that first appeared in 1989 and another, called Fiduciary Reflections, that was published in 2014. The latter tracks developments in Paul's thinking and scholarship on this topic over the past 40 years as well as its reception into law. ... Together, these two books will enable the discerning academic or practitioner to survey large swathes of law. The eminence of the various contributors allows us to be sure that we are shown where the law has come from, where it is going, and where the law in Australia is converging or diverging from that of overseas. Each book shows what vast strides have been made in the coherent understanding of legal and equitable principles, the magnetic interplay between statutory and judge-made law, and the convergence of public and private law discourse that has taken place in the 46 years since Paul Finn first slipped shyly into postgraduate studies at London University." Read Launch Speech...

There is a tension in English law between the idea that the courts might provide a remedy by creating new property rights and the understanding that the judiciary's role is limited to the protection of existing proprietary interests with the power to redistribute property residing in the legislature alone. While there are numerous instances in which the courts intervene to readjust property rights,these are disguised in metaphor and fiction. However, this has meant that the law in this area has developed without open consideration of justifications for redistributing property. The result of this is that there is little coherence in the law of proprietary remedies as a whole and a good deal of it is indefensible. The book examines redistributive processes such as tracing, subrogation and proprietary estoppel and the use of the constructive trust in the context of contracts to assign property, vitiated transactions, the profits of wrongdoing and the breakdown of intimate relationships. It contrasts the English treatment of this area of law with developments in other common law jurisdictions where a more dynamic understanding of property has permitted more open acknowledgement of the judicial role in redistributing proprietary rights.

On July 27,2000 the House of Lords delivered a decision where, for the first time in English law, it explicitly recognised that damages for civil wrongs can be assessed by reference to a defendant (wrongdoer)'s gain rather than a claimant's loss. The circumstances in which such gain-based damages might be available were left for development incrementally. This book considers the nature of gain-based damages and explains when they have historically been available and why, and provides a framework for appreciating the operation of such damages awards. The first part of the book justifies the existence of these damages, which focus upon a defendant wrongdoer's gain made as a result of a civil wrong, explaining the nature and need for such a remedy and the scope of civil wrongs. The core thesis of the book is that two different forms of such gain-based damages exist: the first is concerned with restitution of a defendant's gains wrongfully transferred from a claimant; the second is concerned only with stripping profits from the defendant's hands. Once these two gain-based damages awards are separated they can be shown to be based upon different rationales and the basis for their availability can be easily understood. The second part of the book considers and applies this approach, demonstrating its operation throughout the cases of civil wrongs. The operation of the two forms of gain-based damages is demonstrated in cases in the area of tort (chapter 4), contract (chapter 5), equitable wrongs (chapter 6) and intellectual property wrongs (chapter 7). It is shown that these gain-based damages awards have long been available in these areas and their operation has conformed to clear principle. The difficulty that has obscured the principle is the nomenclature which has hidden the true gain-based nature of many of these damages awards.

In August 2006 the third Australian Obligations Conference was hosted in Brisbane by the TC Beirne School of Law. The theme of the Conference was “Justifying Private Law Remedies”. This book contains a number of the papers delivered at that Conference, presented under several categories but all dealing with the fundamental issue of justification: General Concepts; Performance; Compensation; Punishment; and Restitution and Disgorgement. The authors are largely drawn from the legal academy, and include Canadian, Australian, British and New Zealand scholars. The collection will be of interest to all those concerned with the role, nature and place of remedies in the private law of the common law world.

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 10.0px Arial} This Research Handbook comprehensively and authoritatively reviews the contemporary challenges in research regarding remedies in private law. The Research Handbook on Remedies in Private Law focuses on the most important issues throughout contract, equity, restitution and tort law as they have arisen in the major common law jurisdictions, touching upon those of other jurisdictions where pertinent.