Dishonest Assistance Legal Framework

A trustee who acted honestly but had a lawyer who dishonestly assisted in the breach of trust may not be personally liable if they can prove their honest conduct. However, the lawyer could be liable for dishonest assistance, and the trust could claim against the lawyer.
Do you need more details on how to proceed with a claim against the lawyer?

The law setting out the rules on dishonest assistance in England is primarily based on case law. The landmark case is Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan [*] * AC *, which established the principles for dishonest assistance. Here are the key points:
- Knowledge: The assistant must have knowledge that makes their conduct dishonest.
- Objective Test: Dishonesty is assessed objectively, considering the standards of ordinary decent people.
Do you need more details on how to prove dishonest assistance?

To prove dishonest assistance, you need to demonstrate the following:
- Knowledge: The individual had knowledge of the facts that made their conduct dishonest.
- Dishonesty: The individual's actions are assessed against the standards of ordinary decent people.
Do you need more details on how to gather evidence to support your claim?

If someone meets the criteria for dishonest assistance, they could be held liable for the breach of trust. This could result in the court ordering them to compensate the trust for the losses incurred. The level of liability would depend on the extent of their dishonest involvement and the damages caused.
Do you need more details on the legal process to proceed with such a claim?

The law governing dishonest assistance in England is based on case law, primarily established in:
- Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan [*] * AC *: This case set out the principles for determining dishonest assistance.
Would you like more information on how to proceed with a claim for dishonest assistance?

The law in England does not have a specific statutory provision that establishes the punishment for dishonest assistance. Instead, it is primarily governed by case law, particularly the principles set out in Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan [*] * AC *. The court determines the appropriate remedy, which could include compensatory damages for the loss caused by the dishonesty.
Do you have any other questions or need clarification on a different matter?

In the case of Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [*], the claimant is indeed unable to trace money from an overdrawn account. This means that if £*,* was lost in such circumstances, the claimant may not be entitled to compensation for that specific loss from the overdrawn account. However, other avenues for recovery might be available depending on the specifics of the case.
Do you need more information on alternative legal remedies or actions you could take?

If the claimant cannot trace the money from an overdrawn account, they might consider the following alternative legal remedies:
- Personal Liability of Trustee: If the trustee acted dishonestly or negligently.
- Claim against Third Parties: If other parties, like the dishonest lawyer, were involved.
- Equitable Compensation: May be sought under breach of trust.
Do you need more information on these alternative remedies?