Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Byers v Saudi National Bank - Knowing Receipt C...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

Byers v Saudi National Bank - Knowing Receipt Claim

Favicon for supremecourt.uk UK Supreme Court Decisions
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The UK Supreme Court in Byers v Saudi National Bank (UKSC/2022/0048) has resolved a significant question of trust law regarding knowing receipt claims. The Court confirmed that a claimant seeking to establish liability for knowing receipt of trust property must prove a continuing equitable interest in that property at the time of the defendant's receipt. The appeal by the liquidators of Saad Investments Company Ltd, which contended no such continuing interest was required, was dismissed, affirming the Court of Appeal's decision.

“Whether a claim in knowing receipt requires a claimant to prove a continuing equitable interest in the property transferred to the defendant in breach of trust, in addition to knowledge on the part of the defendant so as to render his receipt unconscionable.”

UKSC , verbatim from source
Published by UKSC on supremecourt.uk . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors UK Supreme Court Decisions for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 9 changes logged to date.

What changed

The Supreme Court considered whether the knowing receipt doctrine in English trust law requires a claimant to demonstrate a continuing equitable interest in property transferred to a defendant in breach of trust, beyond proving the defendant's knowledge rendering receipt unconscionable. The Court affirmed the established position that such a continuing interest must be shown.\n\nFinancial institutions and legal practitioners should note that this ruling maintains the existing evidentiary requirements for knowing receipt claims. Entities involved in trust structures or handling potentially misapplied trust assets should be aware that mere knowledge of breach of trust, without an identifiable continuing equitable interest in the claimant, will not sustain such a claim.

Archived snapshot

Apr 24, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Home Cases
UKSC/2022/0048

BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS

Byers and others (Appellants) v Saudi National Bank (Respondent)

Judgment given

Contents

-

-

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2022/0048

Parties

Appellant(s)

Mark Byers

Hugh Dickinson (as Joint Official Liquidators of Saad Investments Company Ltd)

Saad Investments Company (in liquidation)

Respondent(s)

Saudi National Bank

Issue

Whether a claim in knowing receipt requires a claimant to prove a continuing equitable interest in the property transferred to the defendant in breach of trust, in addition to knowledge on the part of the defendant so as to render his receipt unconscionable.

Facts

The appellants, SICL and its joint liquidators, issued proceedings alleging knowing receipt of trust property against SNB, the respondent, contending that a transfer of shares to Samba, a Saudi Arabian bank whose assets and liabilities were subsequently transferred to SNB, had been made in breach of trust and that Samba had known at the time of the transfer of the appellants' interest in the disputed securities and had incurred liability as a knowing recipient.

The judge found, inter alia, that the liability of a knowing recipient rested on his knowledge that the property he received was trust property and where a recipient was, from the outset, entitled to treat the property as his own, no liability arose. A claim in knowing receipt would, therefore, fail if, on receipt, the beneficiary's equitable interest was extinguished under the law applicable to the transfer and that since, as a matter of Saudi Arabian law, SICL had no continuing equitable interest in the shares after the transfer, the claim in knowing receipt failed.

The appellants' appeal to the Court of Appeal, contending that they were not required to demonstrate a continuing equitable interest in the shares to succeed in their claim, was dismissed. The appellants now appeal to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

24 February 2022

Judgment appealed

[2022] EWCA Civ 43 HTML

Judgment details

Judgment date

20 December 2023

Neutral citation

[2023] UKSC 51

Judgment links

PDF Judgment (PDF)

PDF | 590.03 KB

20 December 2023 PDF Press summary (PDF)

PDF | 165.15 KB

20 December 2023 Judgment on The National Archives (HTML version) HTML

Press summary on The National Archives (HTML Version) HTML

Judgment on BAILII (HTML version) HTML

Judgment summary

20 December 2023

Watch the archived video.

Appeal

Justices

Lord Hodge

Lord Briggs

Lord Leggatt

Lord Burrows

Lord Stephens

Hearing dates

Full hearing

Start date

12 July 2023

End date

13 July 2023

Watch hearings

12 July 2023 - Morning session

Watch the archived video.

12 July 2023 - Afternoon session

Watch the archived video.

13 July 2023 - Morning session

Watch the archived video.

13 July 2023 - Afternoon session

Watch the archived video. All videos on this page are recorded and transmitted in line with the Court's terms of use. These can be found here.

Please Note: Every effort is being made to provide a satisfactory streaming service of the Supreme Court judgments and hearings. However, these services may be subject to technical issues or delay, in which case we will attempt to resolve them as soon as possible.

Change log

Last updated 16 April 2024

Sign up for updates about this case

Sign up to receive email alerts when this case is updated.

Sign up I agree to the Court processing my information in line with its privacy policy.

Named provisions

Knowing Receipt Continuing Equitable Interest

Get daily alerts for UK Supreme Court Decisions

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from UKSC.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
UKSC
Filed
December 20th, 2023
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Judicial
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Document ID
[2023] UKSC 51
Docket
UKSC/2022/0048

Who this affects

Applies to
Banks Legal professionals
Industry sector
5221 Commercial Banking
Activity scope
Knowing receipt claims Trust property disputes Equitable remedies
Geographic scope
United Kingdom GB

Taxonomy

Primary area
Financial Services
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Banking Trusts and Estates

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when UK Supreme Court Decisions publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!