Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Barnes v Addy: the requirements of knowledge

Article Abstract:

Australian, Uk and New Zealand courts have considered the issue of when liability for breach of fiduciary duties can extend to parties not originally charged with the duty based on actual or constructive knowledge. The 1874 English case Barnes v. Addy established that the third party may be liable if the party becomes an agent or provides assistance and has knowledge of the fiduciary's dishonest intent. Knowledge is found if there was actual knowledge or if knowledge would have been obtained in the course of reasonable investigations.

Author: Lodge, Margaret
Publisher: LBC Information Services
Publication Name: Australian Business Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0310-1053
Year: 1995
United Kingdom, New Zealand, Fiduciary duties

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Corporate benefit in relation to guarantees and third party mortgages

Article Abstract:

Corporate benefit inquiry is relevant to issues that arise in the context of third party mortgages and corporate guarantees occurring in the corporate group context. Contrary to popular belief, it is not necessary that all guarantees be supported by the conveyance of some corporate benefit. Lenders should investigate corporate benefit issues when the transactions may be voidable as uncommercial or involving insolvency or constructive trusts.

Author: O'Donovan, James
Publisher: LBC Information Services
Publication Name: Australian Business Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0310-1053
Year: 1996
Mortgages, Suretyship and guaranty, Guarantees, Sureties

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Auditors' duties to third parties - time for the High Court to issue a definitive ruling

Article Abstract:

The High Court of Australia should give a ruling deciding the question of the duties of auditors to third parties. This need is illustrated by two recent decisions. The Victorian Supreme Court decision is R.W. Lowe Lippmann Figdor & Frank v. AGC Advances Pty The New South Wales Supreme Court decision is Columbia Coffee & Tea Pty v. Churchill.

Publisher: LBC Information Services
Publication Name: Australian Business Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0310-1053
Year: 1993
Malpractice, Auditors

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Australia, Laws, regulations and rules, Third parties (Law)
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The limits of choice: school choice reform and state constitutional guarantees of educational quality. A critique of the Bush education proposal
  • Abstracts: Inadequate limits of coverage: protecting the insured while avoiding excess exposure. part 2 Insurers and agents beware: 'attachment statutes' enable insureds to obtain coverage despite misrepresentation
  • Abstracts: Labor pains: the rights of the pregnant employee. A hardy transplant: the duty to accomodate and disability rights in Canadian labour law
  • Abstracts: When unimportant is interesting: the negligible import exception to cumulation in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations
  • Abstracts: IRS provides guidance and forms on SIMPLE plans. Notice 98-2 provides guidance on taxation of annuities from qualified plans
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.