Back
Get in Touch Menu

Turning a blind eye: the concept of 'dishonest assistance'

20 September 2019

The court has shed light on the legal concept of ‘dishonest assistance’, in the recent case of Group Seven Limited & Others v Notable Services LLP & Others [2019].

By way of background, police had investigated an €88M fraud case, in which the money was returned. The Group Seven court case was dealing with issues to include the liability of an accountant, Mr Landman, who received a substantial payment in assisting others in the matter.

The court had to determine whether Mr Landman’s actions amounted to ‘dishonest assistance’.

The legal test for determining this is complicated. It includes an assessment of the actual state of the individual’s knowledge or belief on the facts. When this ‘state of mind’ has been established, the question whether their conduct was dishonest is to be determined by (objective) standards of ordinary decent people.

There is no requirement that the defendant (Mr Landman in this case) must have appreciated that what he had done was by those standards dishonest.

In the Group Seven case, the issue that the court considered was whether Mr Landman had ‘blind eye’ knowledge, even though he allegedly didn’t have actual knowledge of the facts.

In other words, despite his suspicions, did he consciously decide to refrain from trying to confirm the true state of affairs, out of fear of what he might discover?

In this case, when considering the issue of dishonest assistance, the court found that Mr Landman did indeed have ‘blind eye’ knowledge.

This case highlights, particularly for those involved in the administration of trusts, the importance of not ‘turning a blind eye’. If you’re concerned about any transactions, you should actively take reasonable steps to understand the true state of affairs.

As always, if you need pragmatic legal advice, we’re here to help so please get in touch.

Contact us

Disclaimer: All legal information is correct at the time of publication but please be aware that laws may change over time. This article contains general legal information but should not be relied upon as legal advice. Please seek professional legal advice about your specific situation - contact us; we’d be delighted to help.
Contact
Paul Gordon LLB
Partner
View profile
Related services
Share this article
Resources to help

Related articles

Unfair prejudice petitions: Recent shareholder dispute case overturns 40-year precedent

Litigation & dispute resolution

In a recent shareholder dispute, it’s been found that unfair prejudice petitions are subject to statutory limitation periods. This landmark judgment – in Thg Plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey)…

Katie Charlton LLB (Hons), MSc
Trainee solicitor

Wagatha Christie defamation trial

Litigation & dispute resolution

The facts surrounding the “Wagatha Christie” defamation trial have been widely publicised, particularly following Coleen Rooney’s recent appearance on popular reality TV show “I’m a celebrity… Get me out of…

Bethen Abraham LLB (Hons), LLM
Solicitor

The Renters’ Rights Bill – The end of the current housing regime as we know it?

Property

The government made it clear during July’s King’s speech that rental reform is a priority of theirs, and that there will be a new Renters’ Rights Bill. This follows the…

Bethen Abraham LLB (Hons), LLM
Solicitor
Contact us