Home Maxims & Terms Proprietary remedy meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Proprietary remedy

Proprietary remedy legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2014 SCMR 1702 SUPREME-COURT-OF-UK Judicial Precedent
Breach of fiduciary duty by agentBenefit obtained by agentAgent making secret benefit/profit in breach of his fiduciary dutyRemedy for principalProprietary remedyEquitable compensation

Where an agent received a benefit in breach of his fiduciary duty, he was obliged to account to the principal for such a benefit, and to pay, in effect, a sum equal to profit by way of equitable compensation

Principal's right to seek an account undoubtedly gave him a right in equitable compensation in respect of the bribe or secret commission, which equaled the quantum of that bribe or commission (subject to any permissible deduction in favour of the agent - e.g. for expenses incurred)

Where an agent acquired a benefit which came to his notice as a result of his fiduciary position, or pursuant to an opportunity which resulted from his fiduciary position, the general equitable rule was that he was to be treated as having acquired the benefit on behalf of his principal, so it was beneficially owned by the principal

In such cases, the principal had a proprietary remedy in addition to his personal remedy against the agent, and the principal could elect between the two remedies.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Proprietary remedy", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124946910

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Proprietary remedy"

SCMR 2014
Decided on 16th July, 2014.

2014 S C M R 1702

CEDAR CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC — Appellant Versus FHR EUROPEAN VENTURES LLP and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of UK*
SCMR 2026
C.P.L.A. No. 806-P of 2018 and C.M.A. No. 1877-P of 2018, decided on 29th January, 2026.

2026 S C M R 717

NAWAB KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD YOUSAF and others — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
SCMR 2025
Decided on 19th March, 2025.

2025 S C M R 1764

RUKHADZE and others — Appellants Versus RECOVERY PARTNERS GP LTD and another — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of UK*
CLC 2003
Writ Petition No.5 of 2001, decided on 22nd March, 2003.

2003 C L C 1967

Mst. BARKAT JAN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus CUSTODIAN EVACUEE PROPERTY, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Azad J&K
YLR 2003
Writ Petition No. 18234 of 2002, decided on 23rd October, 2002.

2003 Y L R 427

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (COLONIES), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE and 12

Court: Lahore
CLC 1984
Writ Petition No. 2078 of 1982, decided on 14th December, 1983.

1984 C L C 2210

MUHAMMAD HASSAN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 2007
2007-July-30

P L D 2007 Supreme Court (AJ&K) 119

TAHIR MAHMOOD and 3 others — Appellants Versus KHALID SHARIF and 9 others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 1968
Writ Petition No. 658 of 1966, decided on 26th July 1968.

P L D 1968 Lahore 1155

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF‑Petitioner Versus BOARD OF REVENUE, WEST PAKISTAN

Court: (e) Constitution of Pakistan (1962)---Art. 98 read with Art. 2- Party who stands to gain or lose an advantage by observance or non‑observance of law, is an "aggrieved" party under Art. 98 Problem cannot be viewed from an angle which may give observance of law the look of an ex gratia act‑Instructions issued by Board of Revenue in connection with allotment of and transfer of pro prietary rights in land under Grow More Food Scheme, 1956‑Have force of Law and are not merely departmental instructions for information of Revenue Officers.‑Writ Petition No. 684 of 1960 and Raja and others v. Member Board of Revenue and another P L D 1967 Lah. 329 dissented from.
CLC 2008
2007-May-28

2008 C L C 1120

DILSHAD NABI RIAZ and 7 others — Petitioners Versus DISTRICT NAZIM, DISTRICT RAHIMYAR KHAN and 3 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
YLR 2003
Civil Revision No. 1450 of 1995, decided on 18th November, 2002.

2003 Y L R 52

MUHAMMAD NAEEM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Lahore