- Published on
SQE – Equity and Trust – Equitable Compensation
Case Scenario
Nathan and Chloe are trustees of the Harper Family Trust. The trust contains investment funds intended for the benefit of several beneficiaries.
Without proper authority, Nathan transfers £300,000 of trust money into a speculative overseas investment scheme. The investment later collapses and the money disappears completely. The funds cannot be traced because the company has become insolvent and the money has passed through numerous international accounts.
The beneficiaries demand restoration of the trust fund. However, because the original money and assets no longer exist, restitution and tracing are impossible.
The beneficiaries therefore bring a claim for equitable compensation against Nathan.
The issue is whether the court can compensate the beneficiaries for the loss caused by breach of trust.
Equitable Compensation
Definition
Equitable compensation is an equitable monetary remedy awarded for breach of fiduciary duty or breach of trust.
The purpose is to place the beneficiaries back into the position they would have been in had the breach not occurred.
It operates similarly to common law damages but follows equitable principles.
Main Purpose
The remedy seeks to restore the trust fund or beneficiaries to the position they should properly occupy.
The court asks:
“What loss has the breach of trust caused?”
When Is Equitable Compensation Needed?
Equitable compensation is especially important where:
Practical Application
Why Is Restitution Sometimes Impossible?
Ideally, trust property should simply be restored to the trust.
This may happen where:
The beneficiaries must instead seek monetary compensation.
Difference Between Restitution and Equitable Compensation
Restitution
Restitution focuses on:
A trustee wrongfully transfers trust shares but the shares are still identifiable.
The court may order return of the shares.
Equitable Compensation
Equitable compensation applies where restoration is impossible.
The court instead orders the trustee personally to compensate the trust for the financial loss caused by the breach.
Practical Example
Example 1 – Compensation Required
A trustee improperly transfers £500,000 into a fraudulent investment scheme.
The company collapses and the money disappears permanently.
Because the money cannot be traced or recovered, the trustee may be ordered to pay equitable compensation equal to the loss suffered.
Example 2 – Property Destroyed
A trustee wrongfully sells trust artwork below market value and the artwork is later destroyed.
Since the property no longer exists, beneficiaries may seek equitable compensation for the value lost.
Relationship With Common Law Damages
Equitable compensation resembles damages because both provide monetary relief.
However, important differences exist.
Common Law Damages
Common law damages generally focus on:
Equitable Compensation
Equitable compensation focuses more strictly on:
Important Authorities
The principles were discussed extensively in Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns.
The case explored the relationship between equitable compensation and common law damages.
More recently, both equitable compensation and common law damages were awarded in Main v Giambrone.
Solving the Scenario
Nathan breached trust by:
Nathan may therefore be personally liable to restore the lost £300,000 to the trust fund.
Key SQE Principles
Equitable compensation:
Further Research
Key Cases to Review
Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns
Important for:
Main v Giambrone
Important for:
AIB Group (UK) plc v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors
Important for:
Topics Closely Connected to Equitable Compensation
Further SQE revision should include:
Conclusion
Equitable compensation is a key equitable remedy used where trust property cannot be restored or traced. It compensates beneficiaries for losses caused by breach of trust and aims to place them back in the position they would have occupied had the breach not occurred.
The remedy differs from restitution because it provides monetary recovery rather than return of property, and it reflects the strict accountability imposed on trustees and fiduciaries under equity.
Case Scenario
Nathan and Chloe are trustees of the Harper Family Trust. The trust contains investment funds intended for the benefit of several beneficiaries.
Without proper authority, Nathan transfers £300,000 of trust money into a speculative overseas investment scheme. The investment later collapses and the money disappears completely. The funds cannot be traced because the company has become insolvent and the money has passed through numerous international accounts.
The beneficiaries demand restoration of the trust fund. However, because the original money and assets no longer exist, restitution and tracing are impossible.
The beneficiaries therefore bring a claim for equitable compensation against Nathan.
The issue is whether the court can compensate the beneficiaries for the loss caused by breach of trust.
Equitable Compensation
Definition
Equitable compensation is an equitable monetary remedy awarded for breach of fiduciary duty or breach of trust.
The purpose is to place the beneficiaries back into the position they would have been in had the breach not occurred.
It operates similarly to common law damages but follows equitable principles.
Main Purpose
The remedy seeks to restore the trust fund or beneficiaries to the position they should properly occupy.
The court asks:
“What loss has the breach of trust caused?”
When Is Equitable Compensation Needed?
Equitable compensation is especially important where:
- trust property cannot be returned;
- tracing has failed;
- assets no longer exist;
- restitution is impossible;
- property has been dissipated.
Practical Application
Why Is Restitution Sometimes Impossible?
Ideally, trust property should simply be restored to the trust.
This may happen where:
- the asset still exists;
- the property can be traced;
- substitute property can be identified.
- the money disappeared;
- the investment collapsed;
- the assets cannot be traced.
The beneficiaries must instead seek monetary compensation.
Difference Between Restitution and Equitable Compensation
Restitution
Restitution focuses on:
- returning the original property;
- restoring identifiable trust assets.
A trustee wrongfully transfers trust shares but the shares are still identifiable.
The court may order return of the shares.
Equitable Compensation
Equitable compensation applies where restoration is impossible.
The court instead orders the trustee personally to compensate the trust for the financial loss caused by the breach.
Practical Example
Example 1 – Compensation Required
A trustee improperly transfers £500,000 into a fraudulent investment scheme.
The company collapses and the money disappears permanently.
Because the money cannot be traced or recovered, the trustee may be ordered to pay equitable compensation equal to the loss suffered.
Example 2 – Property Destroyed
A trustee wrongfully sells trust artwork below market value and the artwork is later destroyed.
Since the property no longer exists, beneficiaries may seek equitable compensation for the value lost.
Relationship With Common Law Damages
Equitable compensation resembles damages because both provide monetary relief.
However, important differences exist.
Common Law Damages
Common law damages generally focus on:
- remoteness;
- foreseeability;
- causation rules.
Equitable Compensation
Equitable compensation focuses more strictly on:
- restoring the trust fund;
- fiduciary accountability;
- protecting beneficiaries.
Important Authorities
The principles were discussed extensively in Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns.
The case explored the relationship between equitable compensation and common law damages.
More recently, both equitable compensation and common law damages were awarded in Main v Giambrone.
Solving the Scenario
Nathan breached trust by:
- transferring trust money without proper authority;
- exposing the trust fund to improper risk;
- causing loss to beneficiaries.
- the money no longer exists;
- tracing is impossible;
- restitution cannot occur,
Nathan may therefore be personally liable to restore the lost £300,000 to the trust fund.
Key SQE Principles
Equitable compensation:
- is an equitable monetary remedy;
- applies mainly to breach of trust and fiduciary duties;
- restores beneficiaries to the position they would have occupied absent the breach;
- is commonly used where tracing or restitution is impossible.
Further Research
Key Cases to Review
Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns
Important for:
- relationship between equitable compensation and common law damages;
- causation principles in breach of trust claims;
- restoration of trust funds.
Main v Giambrone
Important for:
- concurrent award of equitable compensation and common law damages;
- solicitor’s fiduciary liability;
- professional negligence overlap.
AIB Group (UK) plc v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors
Important for:
- limits of equitable compensation;
- causation analysis;
- modern approach to assessing trustee liability.
Topics Closely Connected to Equitable Compensation
Further SQE revision should include:
- tracing in equity;
- proprietary remedies;
- constructive trusts;
- fiduciary duties;
- breach of trust remedies;
- account of profits;
- equitable rescission;
- restitution;
- causation in equity.
Conclusion
Equitable compensation is a key equitable remedy used where trust property cannot be restored or traced. It compensates beneficiaries for losses caused by breach of trust and aims to place them back in the position they would have occupied had the breach not occurred.
The remedy differs from restitution because it provides monetary recovery rather than return of property, and it reflects the strict accountability imposed on trustees and fiduciaries under equity.
0 Comments