In fashioning equitable relief for knowing receipt of trust property, the court is not required to limit disgorgement to the differential between what the defendant actually received and what it would have received in a hypothetical liquidation. Compensatory compound interest is to be calculated on the full amount of primary monetary relief, and the possibility that subordinated creditors may receive distributions they would not otherwise have received does not justify capping the interest award where those creditors are not wrongdoers. Relief cannot be granted in substance for the benefit of non-party entities by framing it as protection of plaintiff rights, as this amounts to rescission 'through the back door'. Where a defendant's own actions (such as releasing securities) create the impossibility of restoration, the defendant cannot rely on that impossibility to defeat the plaintiff's claim to equitable relief.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 17 later cases that cite this judgment.