Practical Justice and Appropriate Relief: Grimaldi v Chameleon Mining Nl (No 2)

10 Pages Posted: 19 Nov 2012 Last revised: 24 Nov 2012

See all articles by Nyuk Nahan

Nyuk Nahan

The University of Western Australia Law School

Date Written: November 18, 2012

Abstract

Grimaldi v Chameleon Mining NL (No 2) is a sumptuous case for teachers and students of fiduciary law. Its facts give rise to the whole range of issues associated with breaches of fiduciary obligations.

This note considers the question of ‘appropriate’ relief in the pursuit of ‘practical justice’ which is reviewed at length by the Federal Court. There is apparently ‘a level of predictability to the award of remedy in routine cases’ obtained from the ‘mixture of learning, intuition and experience’ in light of the ‘purpose of a doctrine.’ Although there are no rights to particular remedies, it is ‘the case that, in many instances and for many types of equitable wrong, the remedy that is the most appropriate will self-select absent unusual circumstances’.

Keywords: fiduciary duties, breach, company law, mining

Suggested Citation

Nahan, Nyuk, Practical Justice and Appropriate Relief: Grimaldi v Chameleon Mining Nl (No 2) (November 18, 2012). UWA Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2012-07, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2177453 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2177453

Nyuk Nahan (Contact Author)

The University of Western Australia Law School ( email )

M253
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Australia

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
584
Abstract Views
2,316
Rank
85,658
PlumX Metrics