Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan [1995] 2 AC 378

Facts

  • Royal Brunei Airlines entered into an arrangement with a travel agency, which was to hold certain funds on trust for the airline.
  • Mr. Tan, director of the travel agency, misapplied funds that were held on trust, using them for the agency’s own purposes.
  • Royal Brunei Airlines suffered financial loss as a result of the misappropriation.
  • The central question was whether Mr. Tan could be personally liable for the breach of trust, even if he did not personally benefit from the misappropriated funds.

Issues

  1. Whether dishonesty, for the purpose of establishing third party liability in breach of trust, should be assessed by an objective or subjective standard.
  2. Whether a fiduciary or third party who does not personally benefit from a breach of trust can be held personally liable based on their role and state of mind.
  3. The circumstances under which third parties assisting in a breach of trust may be found personally liable.

Decision

  • The House of Lords held that dishonesty is to be judged by the standards of ordinary, reasonable people, introducing an objective standard for such assessments.
  • It was determined that a fiduciary or third party can be personally liable for a breach of trust if their conduct is dishonest by this objective test, regardless of personal benefit.
  • The court clarified that knowledge and state of mind of the defendant remain relevant but must be considered against societal norms of honesty.
  • The liability of third parties is not limited to individuals knowingly participating in a breach; it extends to those whose conduct fails to meet the required objective standard of honesty.

Legal Principles

  • Dishonesty in trust and fiduciary law is assessed objectively, by the standards of ordinary, reasonable people, not the defendant's subjective views.
  • An individual may be personally liable for breach of trust if found dishonest by this objective standard, regardless of whether they derived financial benefit.
  • Third parties who assist in a breach can be liable if their actions would be considered dishonest by societal standards, broadening the potential scope of liability in fiduciary contexts.
  • The court’s approach ensures consistent application of the law and reflects societal expectations of honesty in professional dealings.

Conclusion

Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan clarified that liability for assisting in a breach of trust is determined by the objective standard of dishonesty, making conduct, rather than intent or personal gain, central to personal liability for breach of trust and fiduciary obligations.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal