Ikbal v Sterling Law [2013] EWHC 3291 (Ch), [2013] All ER (D) 31 (Nov)
The claimant brought an action against his former solicitors, who had acted for him on a property transaction. The claim alleged breach of trust. The court ruled that it was necessary in every case to identify what the terms of the trust on which the defendant received funds
were. It was necessary then to consider whether, on the facts, what happened was sufficient to discharge the trust. Subject to any application by the solicitor for relief under s 61 of the Trustee Act 1925: (a) if there was a breach of trust and the underlying commercial transaction had not completed, then the beneficiary could still require the solicitor to restore the trust fund; or (b) if there was a breach of trust followed by completion of the underlying commercial transaction, the beneficiary would be entitled to equitable compensation which looked not to the fact of loss of the fund but to the loss which, could be seen to have been caused by the breach. What the claimant lost when the breach occurred was the amount of money
