Open AccessGalambos v Perez, its Critics, and the Equity-Certainty Paradox in Fiduciary Law
Author(s) -
Calvin DeWolfe
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
the university of western ontario journal of legal studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1927-9132
DOI - 10.5206/uwojls.v11i1.10724
Subject(s) - fiduciary , equity (law) , post hoc , supreme court , law and economics , certainty , law , political science , economics , philosophy , epistemology , duty , medicine , dentistry
This paper examines the merits of the current approach to identifying ad hoc fiduciary duties in Canada, which was exposited by the Supreme Court of Canada in its 2009 Galambos v Perez decision. The indicia of fiduciary relationships expressed in Galambos, I argue, are sufficiently comprehensive and certain to overcome popular academic criticisms of the indicia-based ad hoc approach. Specifically, I will challenge the arguments of the contractarian scholar Anthony Duggan and the equity-focused scholar Leonard Rotman -- both of which argue, albeit from different ends of the academic spectrum, that ad hoc fiduciary duties should not be identified using indicia.