Proprietary remedy confirmed for bribes and secret commissions

[thumbnail of Whayman - FHR for SSRN.pdf]
Preview
Text - Accepted Version
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Whayman, D. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1026-5646 (2014) Proprietary remedy confirmed for bribes and secret commissions. The Conveyancer and Property Lawyer (6). pp. 518-525. ISSN 0010-8200

Abstract/Summary

Comments on the Supreme Court ruling in FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC on whether a principal's remedy against a fiduciary who accepts a secret commission or bribe in breach of fiduciary duty, is proprietary. Reviews key features of the ruling, the position of personal disgorgement claims, and the issues not decided by the court, including the theoretical justifications for creating a property right. Explains the need for further litigation to clarify unresolved matters.

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/117604
Refereed Yes
Divisions No Reading authors. Back catalogue items
Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Law
Publisher Sweet and Maxwell
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar