NOTE 61. ADD: Roberts v R [2002] 4 S.C.R. 245; (2002) 220 D.L.R. (4th) 1 at [83]; Chirnside v Fay [2004] 3 N.Z.L.R. 637 at [51] “it is not the function of fiduciary law to mediate between the various interests of parties who are dealing with each other. That is for contract law. Fiduciary law serves to support the integrity and utility of relationships in which the role of one party is perceived to be the service of the interests of the other. It does so by imposing a specific duty of loyalty.”

NOTE 62. Add: Ratiu v Conway [2005] EWCA Civ 1302 at [71]-[72]; Strother v 3464920 Canada Inc [2007] SCC 24 at [141].

ADD AT END OF PARAGRAPH: "not every breach of duty by a fiduciary is a breach of fiduciary duty": Hilton v Barker Booth & Eastwood [2005] UKHL 8; [2005] 1 W.L.R. 567 at [29]; Bristol & West Building Society v Mothew [1998] Ch. 1 at 16; Base Metal Trading Ltd v Shamurin [2004] EWCA Civ 1316; [2005] 1 All E.R. (Comm.) 17 at [19]; Chirnside v Fay [2006] NZSC 68 at [15], [72] & [73]; Strother v 3464920 Canada Inc [2007] SCC 24 at [34]; South Australia v Peat Marwick Mitchell & Co (1997) 24 A.C.S.R. 231, 266.