More clues as to the nature of the remedy for breach of trust: Creggy v Barnett

[thumbnail of Creggy v2.1 TYPO FIXES.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 (2017) More clues as to the nature of the remedy for breach of trust: Creggy v Barnett. The Conveyancer and Property Lawyer (2). ISSN 0010-8200

Abstract/Summary

Discusses the Court of Appeal's obiter ruling in Barnett v Creggy on whether a claim for equitable compensation for the breach of trust of paying away trust money without authorisation engaged the Limitation Act 1980 s.29(5)(a), with the effect that the trustee's acknowledgement of the debt or other liquidated sum restarted the limitation period. Considers its implications for determining the nature of the remedy for the breach of trust.

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/117607
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