← All Authorities
United Kingdom Leading Case nature of fiduciary relationshipcharitable trusts

Lehtimäki v Cooper

[2020] UKSC 33
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtUK Supreme Court
Year2020
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A court may direct a fiduciary to exercise a discretion in a particular way where only one course is consistent with fiduciary duty; members of a charitable company hold their powers as fiduciaries.

Key Principle

Court can direct a fiduciary to exercise a discretion in a particular way where only one course is consistent with fiduciary duties. Charitable company members hold powers as fiduciaries.

Area of Law

equity

Related Cases

Australian Financial Services and Leasing Pty Ltd v Hills Industries Ltd (2014) 253 CLR 560

Change of position is a defence to a claim in unjust enrichment for mistaken payments where the defendant has detrimentally relied on the receipt.

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton (2012) 246 CLR 498

Unjust enrichment claims for money paid under illegal contracts may succeed if recovery is consistent with the statutory policy underlying the illegality.

Friend v Brooker (2009) 239 CLR 129

Equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty does not require but-for causation, and a fiduciary must account for profits made in breach of their stringent obligations.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Lehtimäki v Cooper and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Lehtimäki v Cooper