In a personal injury case, what is the standard for determining whether a party owes a fiduciary obligation?

In their dissent in Hodgkinson v. Simms, McLachlin J., as she then was, and Sopinka J. offered the following warning about applying too flexible a standard in determining whether a party owes a fiduciary duty. At ¶127, they wrote: The difficulty lies in determining what measure of confidence and trust are sufficient to give rise to a fiduciary obligation. An objective criterion must be found to identify this measure if the law is to permit people to conduct their affairs with some degree of certainty. … The vast disparity between the remedies for negligence and breach of contract – the usual remedies for ill-given advice – and those for breach of fiduciary obligation, impose a duty on the court to offer clear assistance to those concerned to stay in the former camp and not stray into the latter.