When someone loses money through a breach of trust, especially in fraud or misappropriation cases, it’s not always just the wrongdoer who can be held responsible. Sometimes, third parties who benefit from the wrongdoing or help in some way can also be held legally accountable. In Singapore, this is where the legal concepts of knowing receipt and dishonest assistance come into play.
Both dishonest assistance and knowing receipt help to ensure that third parties don’t walk away unscathed when they’ve knowingly contributed to a breach of trust—or knowingly received property that should never have come to them in the first place. These concepts are often applied together, though they target slightly different behaviours.
Let’s break them down so you know what they mean and when they apply.
What Is Dishonest Assistance?
Dishonest assistance happens when someone knowingly helps another person breach a fiduciary duty or trust, usually with dishonest intent. They don’t have to benefit financially. The focus here is on the help they give and the dishonesty in their actions.
In Singapore, the test for dishonesty follows the standards set out by the Courts in earlier case law. The person must be shown to have acted dishonestly by the standards of reasonable people—and they must have known they were doing something wrong. There is no need to prove criminal dishonesty, just civil dishonesty.
Dishonest assistance is commonly raised in high-value fraud or trust breach claims, especially where multiple parties are involved. If you knowingly help someone misdirect or misuse money or property held in trust, the law can hold you accountable—even if you were just a supporting character.
What Is Knowing Receipt?
Knowing receipt applies when someone receives property or money that was transferred to them in breach of trust—and they knew, or should have known, something was wrong. The key question is whether the recipient had knowledge of the breach, or enough information to suggest they should have investigated further.
The Courts will assess:
- Whether the recipient had actual or constructive knowledge of the breach
- If the receipt of assets was unjust, based on the surrounding facts
- Whether it would be unconscionable to allow them to keep the benefit
So, if someone receives money from a trust fund that was misapplied, and they had reason to believe it was improperly transferred, they can be liable under the concept of knowing receipt—even if they weren’t actively helping anyone commit wrongdoing.
Dishonest Assistance And Knowing Receipt: What’s The Difference?
Dishonest assistance focuses on the actions of someone who helps a trustee or fiduciary commit a wrong. It doesn’t matter if the helper benefited financially or not. The main issue is that they knowingly and dishonestly lent a hand in carrying out the breach. For example, this could be someone who helps transfer funds out of a trust account, fully aware that it’s being done improperly.
On the other hand, knowing receipt deals with someone who receives property that came from a breach of trust. The emphasis here isn’t on what they did to assist, but rather on what they received and whether they had reason to suspect the transaction wasn’t above board. If they knew—or had enough information to suggest—they were receiving misapplied assets, and they still went ahead and kept them, they could be liable.
So, in simpler terms: dishonest assistance is about helping the wrongdoing happen, while knowing receipt is about benefiting from it. In many fraud or trust breach cases, the Court may consider both angles, especially if a person was involved at different stages of the wrongdoing.
What Can Victims Do?
For starters, you can bring a civil claim against the person who assisted in the breach or received your assets unfairly. You’ll need to show evidence—such as financial documents, emails, transaction records, or other communications—that support your case. The Courts in Singapore are very fact-sensitive when it comes to these matters, and each case will be assessed based on the specific conduct and knowledge of the parties involved.
It’s also important to move quickly. Evidence can disappear, and delays can weaken your position. Getting advice from a law firm experienced in handling trust breaches can make a real difference. They can help you investigate where the money went, identify who was involved, and take legal action accordingly.
At the end of the day, victims aren’t powerless. With the right legal support and a clear understanding of dishonest assistance and knowing receipt, it’s possible to recover lost assets and hold the responsible parties accountable.
Conclusion About Dishonest Assistance And Knowing Receipt
Knowing receipt and dishonest assistance are not just legal technicalities—they’re ways for victims to seek justice from all responsible parties. Whether it’s someone who helped move the money or someone who accepted it with questionable knowledge, the law in Singapore holds them to account.
At Tembusu Law, our team understands the challenges that victims face in complex trust and fraud disputes. Our experience in trust litigation, combined with our position as the best criminal lawyers in Singapore, means we’re well-placed to guide clients through difficult situations involving dishonesty, asset transfers, and breach of trust.
If you believe you’ve been affected by a breach of trust, contact us for a free legal consultation today. Let us help you protect what’s rightfully yours.
Frequently Asked Questions About Dishonest Assistance And Knowing Receipt
Can A Person Be Liable For Both Dishonest Assistance And Knowing Receipt?
Yes, a person can be liable for both if they played multiple roles—such as helping with the breach and also receiving the misapplied assets. The Court will look at their conduct and level of knowledge in each part.
What Type Of Knowledge Is Required For Knowing Receipt?
The recipient must have actual or constructive knowledge of the breach. Constructive knowledge means they had enough facts to raise suspicion but ignored the warning signs or failed to make reasonable enquiries.
Do I Need To Prove Dishonesty To Succeed In A Knowing Receipt Claim?
No, dishonesty is not required for knowing receipt. What matters is whether the person received the property knowing—or having enough reason to know—that it came from a breach of trust.
What Is The Standard Of Proof In Dishonest Assistance Claims?
The standard of proof is based on the balance of probabilities. You must show that a reasonable person would consider the assistance dishonest and that the person involved knew they were acting improperly.
What Are Some Examples Of Dishonest Assistance?
Examples include helping transfer money that was misappropriated, creating documents to hide a breach, or giving advice that supports a trustee in breaching their duties.
