ABSTRACT
The purpose of this chapter is to draw together some of our considerations of the idea of fiduciary duties in this book. Fiduciary responsibility is open-textured (in that the categories of fiduciary responsibility are always capable of expansion) and yet it is supported by some inflexible legal rules (for example, relating to fiduciaries taking unauthorised profits and allowing conflicts of interest, preserving the confidence of their beneficiaries, and acting with unswerving loyalty to the terms of their duties). This combination ensures protection for the beneficiaries of a fiduciary relationship once they have been accepted into the categories of fiduciary duty. Nevertheless, there are differences of opinion as to the extent of the fiduciary concept. Some judges, such as Millett LJ (as he was) preferred a model of fiduciary duties that was commercially convenient. He achieved this by limiting the scope of those fiduciary duties for professional fiduciaries so that many commercial arrangements would fall outside the fiduciary category altogether. Other judges, such as Lord Browne-Wilkinson, preferred a broad model of fiduciary duties which covered many arrangements but with terms which were heavily dependent on their context. These differences of opinion will emerge from the discussion to follow.
