What is the current state of the law on fiduciary discretion in a personal injury relationship?

In Frame v. Smith, 1987 CanLII 74 (SCC), [1987] 2 S.C.R. 99 (S.C.C.), Wilson J., in a dissenting judgment, set out at p. 116 the following guidelines: “Relationships in which a fiduciary obligation have been imposed seem to possess three general characteristics: (1) The fiduciary has scope for the exercise of some discretion or power. (2) The fiduciary can unilaterally exercise that power or discretion so as to affect the beneficiary’s legal or practical interests. (3) The beneficiary is particularly vulnerable to or at the mercy of the fiduciary holding the discretion or power.”