“The decision in Sinclair v Versailles to favour the reasoning of Lister v Stubbs over A-G of Hong v Reid has substantially reduced the ambit of proprietary claims arising from a breach of fiduciary duty but in manner which fails to take into account the legitimate arguments on both sides of the debate and which fails to accord with the interpretation of several established authorities. The result may find favour with those who champion the cause of the unsecured creditor but the reasoning, and use of authority, is subject to serious challenge.”
The full article can be read by subscribers in Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly [2012]
