If a fiduciary relationship between a financial advisor and a client has been found to be fraudulent, what are the reasons why, if any, would the courts and society support such an effort?

Further, there may be valid policy reasons why society, including the courts, would support such an effort, especially in a field where the potential for abuse of trust has been endemic. As put in Hodgkinson v. Simms, at p. 420: Apart from the idea that a person has breached a trust, there is a wider reason to support fiduciary relationships in the case of financial advisors. These are occupations where advisors to whom a person gives trust has power over a vast sum of money, yet the nature of their position is such that specific regulation might frustrate the very function they have to perform. By enforcing a duty of honesty and good faith, the courts are able to regulate an activity that is of great value to commerce and society generally.