Assigning Responsibility for Investment Error (a poll; please provide

[Guest ASIRE]

If a custodian instructs an investment manager to liquidate a substantial portfolio, and the investment manager follows those instructions, which of the parties do you feel is at fault if the custodian had no authority under the controlling documents (i.e., the custodial agreement) to give those instructions and the investment manager had no authority under the controlling documents (i.e., the investment management agreement) to follow those instructions? The custodian? The investment manager? Both of them (what percentage)?

Do you believe it is industry practice for these types of instructions to be funneled to the investment manager through the custodian, or do such instructions typically come directly from the person/group that has authority to issue those instructions (e.g., from the trustee)?

If you believe it is the industry practice for the custodian to act as a conduit to deliver instructions from the trustee to the investment manager, does that industry practice absolve or at least lessen the investment manager's responsibity for acting at the direction of an unauthorized individual (if you feel the investment manager has any responsibility at all)?

Thanks in advance for your input.