Solicitor – Duty. The bank had issued proceedings against the defendant firm of solicitors for breach of trust in connection with a re-mortgage transaction. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the judge had been entitled to find that the solicitors had acted in breach of trust in failing to use the bank's advance to fully discharge the prior charge on the property, but had erred in finding that the breach was limited to the amount of the shortfall which would have been necessary to fully discharge the prior charge in circumstances where the solicitors had had no authority to release any of the funds. However, the relief granted was equitable compensation calculated by reference to actual loss related to the undischarged prior charge. The Supreme Court, in dismissing the bank's appeal, affirmed the general approach to the assessment of equitable compensation for breach of trust as described in Target Holdings Ltd v Redferns (a firm) [1995] 3 All ER 785.