The claimants claim arose from a security given in replacement of an earlier charge. The second charge included an additional clause for payment of a service charge. The claimants as solicitors trustee did not mention the additional charge. The defendant sought to defend on the basis that the claimants were in breach of a fiduciary duty, or breach of confidence. To establish such an action the party asserting it did not need to show any conscious disloyalty, but did have to show some transfer of property. In this case, any failure was inadvertent, and would not have affected the decision to execute the deed, and the counterclaim was dismissed.
Citations:
Gazette 11-May-2001
Equity
Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82552
