Reflective Reflection On Law Of Property

During my second year at YLS, the focus of my studies has shifted. Whereas the majority of my studies in year one revolved around the common law, this last year my legal education has focused upon the prevalence of the courts of equity in relation to the law of obligations and the law of property. Most notably, I have explored the far-reaching application of equitable redress. Additionally, another topic, which was touched upon last year, has been a core element of my work in relation to the interaction between the law and commerce - fiduciary duty. I have actively considered the functions of these two legal 'items ' in my foundation stream modules - Property 2 and Obligations 2.

This reflective report shall focus predominantly on the concept

The issues we had to explore in this problem were a possible breach of trust as well as breach of fiduciary duty. I had always found it difficult to distinguish between the two, owing to the similar duties they give rise to, even with explanation from lectures and the block guide; however, this PBL illustrated the distinction between the two. For failing to act in accordance with the duty of care he owed to his beneficiaries under the Trustee Act 2000, by imprudently investing trust money, the trustee might have breached the trust. But, because the assets he purchased belonged to himself, it was possible that the trustee was also in breach of fiduciary duty. From this I found that fiduciary relationships may be broken when an individual, such as a solicitor, fails to put their client 's interests ahead of their own in commercial contractual transactions, but fiduciary relationships may be broken when a trustee fails to avoid conflict between their personal interests and their duty to protect trust assets - this is the first overarching

In the scenario above, I considered how the beneficiaries might have been compensated for the unauthorised profit that was made at their expense. In respect to this, amongst other equitable remedies, the court may have ordered the trustee to deliver an account of profits with respect to the misappropriated trust money. In my studies, I became aware of another circumstance in which the court may order the delivery of an account of profits, for a breach of contract. I had come across this remedy in an Obligations 2 lecture that looked at equitable remedies for breach of contract; McKendrick called the action that gives rise to the remedy 'enrichment by wrongdoing ', which seemingly parallels unjust enrichment. The difference is the formulation of enrichment by wrongdoing is that the defendant, as a result of their breach of contract, had received an unjust benefit in the form of profit he would not have otherwise made. The leading case in this area is A-G v Blake, which states that the remedy is only available in exceptional circumstances where no other remedies are adequate and the claimant has a legitimate interest in deny the defendant of their surplus profit; the court, furthermore, must be satisfied that the all of the circumstances of the case warrant that an account of profits to be ordered. Thus, the concept of delivering an account of profits can has