Australia: Knowingly assisting fraud: Victorian Court of Appeal provides guidance

Harstedt Pty Ltd v Tomanek [2018] VSCA 84

Often, when fraud occurs, the victim is left with very few (if any) options for recovery against the fraudster. Typically, this is either because the fraudster has no remaining assets against which a judgment can be enforced, or in extreme circumstances, the fraudster has 'skipped town' and cannot be located.

The victim's only options are therefore third parties who may have been involved in the commission of the fraudulent conduct.

Recently, the Victorian Court of Appeal handed down a decision casting light on the issue of when a third party can be held responsible for its involvement in fraudulent activity.


The case involved Harstedt Pty Ltd (Harstedt) seeking to invest in a scheme whereby investors were promised handsome profits, to be generated by the investment of capital by a humanitarian organisation. Harstedt deposited $250,000 into a bank account in the name of Apollo Development Enterprises Pty Ltd (Apollo). Several months later, a director of Apollo and another investor arranged for the funds in the account, including the sum deposited by Harstedt, to be transferred to an account in Spain that was not in the name of Apollo. From there, the funds vanished without a trace.

Harstedt commenced proceedings against Apollo and others associated with Apollo, including Apollo's company secretary, Mr Tomanek. Harstedt argued that Apollo had committed a fraudulent breach of trust by transferring the funds overseas into an account not in the name of Apollo, without the consent of investors. Harstedt also argued that Mr Tomanek, as company secretary, was also liable as a 'knowing assistant' in the fraud.1

The trial judge decided in favour of Harstedt against Apollo, deciding that Apollo's conduct in transferring the funds amounted to a fraudulent and dishonest breach of trust. Mr Lopez, who was a director of Apollo was also found to be liable as 'knowing assistant' in the fraud.

Relevantly, however, the trial judge dismissed Harstedt's claim against Mr Tomanek.

In the proceedings before the Victorian Court of Appeal, Harstedt appealed the decision to dismiss the claim against Mr Tomanek.

Whilst ultimately deciding in favour of Mr Tomanek, their Honours2 helpfully identified the different types of claims that can be made against third parties who are involved in breaches of fiduciary duties.

Their Honours then dealt with what is required to prove 'assistance' of a breach of trust or fiduciary duty, including a discussion of what is necessary to establish 'knowledge' of fraudulent activity.

Claims against third parties

Importantly, Harstedt did not allege that Mr Tomanek had received, dealt with, or otherwise benefitted in any way from the misappropriation of the funds held by Apollo.3 Rather, Harstedt sought to allege that Mr Tomanek was liable on the basis that he, like Mr Lopez, was a 'knowing assistant' in the fraud perpetrated by Apollo. Their Honours noted that the state of the law on accessorial liability in this context has been riddled with uncertainty and disunity.

In addition to the 'knowing receipt' form of liability, where a party has actually received or benefitted from misappropriated funds from a breach of fiduciary duty or fraudulent activity, their Honours discussed the various other forms of liability which may attach to third parties, summarised briefly below:

  • 'Knowing assistance' in the breach – where a person knowingly assists with a dishonest and fraudulent scheme. This was the claim brought against Mr Tomanek and is discussed further below
  • 'Knowing inducement' or immediate procurement of the breach – where a third party procures or in some way induces fraudulent conduct or a breach of fiduciary duty they may be liable as an accessory. This type of liability is distinct from someone who actually participates or assists in the fraud
  • Corporate alter ego – where a company is the 'corporate creature or vehicle' of the wrongdoer. In such cases, the company is fully liable for the profits made as a result of the fraudulent activity or the breach of the fiduciary duty, and
  • Trustee de son tort – essentially, this is where a party is not a trustee but presumes to act as a trustee and then commits a breach of trust or fraudulently profits from their position. In such circumstances, the trustee is to be held liable as a 'trustee de son tort', translated as, 'of his own wrong'.

Although it may seem that the above categories draw extremely fine and possibly arbitrary distinctions in relation to fraudulent and dishonest conduct by either corporate entities or individuals, the decision in Harstedt serves as a timely reminder that it is imperative for pleadings and causes of action to be appropriately framed to ensure the best possible prospects of recovery for litigants.

'Knowing assistance' by a third party

In Harstedt, their Honours took the opportunity to canvass the elements required to establish that a person has 'knowingly assisted' fraudulent conduct or a breach of a fiduciary duty. It was alleged by Harstedt that, although Mr Tomanek did not directly benefit from the fraudulent scheme devised by Apollo, he should nonetheless be held liable on the basis that he assisted in the scheme. Under Australian law, the necessary elements of establishing liability of a third party for 'knowing assistance' are generally understood as follows:

  • the existence of a fiduciary duty (as trustee or otherwise)
  • a dishonest and fraudulent breach on the part of the fiduciary
  • assistance by the third party in that breach, and
  • knowledge on the part of the third party of the circumstances constituting that breach.

It was common ground between the parties that at the time of the transfer of the funds, Apollo, as trustee of an express trust, owed Harstedt a fiduciary duty in respect of the $250,000 deposited into Apollo's bank account. Further, Mr Tomanek conceded that Apollo's conduct was dishonest and fraudulent, amounting to a breach of the fiduciary duty owed to Harstedt.

However, the key questions before the court was whether Mr Tomanek had the requisite knowledge of the fraudulent conduct and whether he had 'assisted' Apollo in perpetrating the fraud against Harstedt.


In finding that it was 'more probable than not'4 that Mr Tomanek had knowledge of Apollo's fraudulent scheme, their Honours provided useful guidance on the requirement of knowledge when establishing liability on the part of third parties involved in fraud and breaches of fiduciary duties. Referring to the decision in Baden5, their Honours held that knowledge can be established within one of the following categories:

  1. actual knowledge
  2. wilfully shutting one's eyes to the obvious
  3. wilfully and recklessly failing to make such inquiries as an honest and reasonable person would make
  4. knowledge of circumstances which would indicate the facts to an honest and reasonable person, or
  5. knowledge of circumstances which would put an honest and reasonable person on inquiry.

Their Honours affirmed the position that since the High Court's decision in Farah6, knowledge falling within any of the first four of the above categories, but crucially not the fifth, represents the law in Australia.

However, the finding that Mr Tomanek had knowledge of Apollo's conduct was not sufficient to entitle Harstedt to relief from Mr Tomanek. Harstedt was additionally required to prove that Mr Tomanek also had in fact 'assisted' Apollo.


Their Honours noted that case law on the issue of what constitutes 'assistance' in respect of third party liability currently offers very little guidance and that 'in practical terms, the ways in which a third party may provide assistance are myriad.'7

Harstedt argued that evidence of Mr Tomanek's assistance could be found, among other things, in the fact he was company secretary of Apollo, signatory to its bank accounts and was promoter of the fraudulent scheme in question.

Mr Tomanek in response argued that Harstedt had failed to adduce any evidence that pointed to any active involvement in Apollo's fraudulent conduct. In fact, Harstedt was forced to concede that it could not point to any individual act by Mr Tomanek that facilitated the transfer of the investors' funds.

In this regard, it was accepted that Mr Tomanek had not authorised the debiting of Apollo's bank account when the funds were transferred overseas.

Their Honours concluded their remarks by noting that simply because a company officer is considered part of the 'inner sanctum' of a company, this does not mean that the officer assists or participates in any dishonest and fraudulent activities of the company.

Assistance by acquiescence?

Crucially, Harstedt advanced its claim against Mr Tomanek only on the basis of direct and active involvement in the fraudulent conduct of Apollo, which it was unable to sustain.

It did not contend that Mr Tomanek acquiesced in Apollo's dishonest and fraudulent design such that his acquiescence caused the loss arising from Apollo's fraudulent conduct and breach of fiduciary duty. Their Honours therefore did not need to determine whether mere acquiescence could amount to 'knowing assistance' by a third party.

Their Honours did, however, note that the authorities on this point 'appear to be in disharmony'.8

The answer to this question may have significant implications in future cases as it will be necessary to determine to what extent a person can simply 'turn a blind eye' to fraudulent conduct and not be held responsible.

In any case, this decision serves as an important reminder to litigants that careful pleading is required when framing an action for breach of fiduciary duty or the existence of fraudulent conduct on the basis of 'knowing assistance'.


1 In Barnes v Addy (1874) 9 Ch App 244, the seminal decision dealing with breaches of trusts and fiduciary duties, it was held that a third party could breach a trust either by 'knowing receipt' or 'knowing assistance'.
2 Santamaria, McLeish and Niall JJA.
3 This form of 'knowing receipt' liability is often called the 'first limb' of Barnes v Addy, see above footnote 1.
4 [2018] VSCA 84, 103.
5 Baden v Société Générale pour Favoriser le Dévelopment du Commerce et de l'Industrie en France SA [1992] 4 All ER 16. 6 Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd (2007) 230 CLR 89.
7 [2018] VSCA 84, 116.
8 [2018] VSCA 84, 84.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions