Equitable Compensation and the Brickenden “Rule” After Winsta Holding Pte Ltd and another v Sim Poh Ping and others

• Main Author: LIU, Nicholas
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2019
• Subjects: Brickenden rule; Causation; Equitable compensation; Equity; Fiduciaries; Torts
• Online Access: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2923; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/4881/viewcontent/Equitable_Compensation_and_the_Brickenden__Rule__After_Winsta_Holding_Pte_Ltd.pdf
• Institution: Singapore Management University

The Brickenden rule, which was thought to provide an exception to the requirement of but-for causation of loss in equitable compensation for breach of fiduciary duty, has recently been rejected by the Singapore High Court in Winsta Holding Pte Ltd and another v Sim Poh Ping and others (Winsta Holding). This case comment suggests that although the substantive position arrived at in Winsta Holding is a sound one, it should not entail a rejection of the Brickenden rule. Properly understood, the Brickenden “rule” is consistent with the requirement that the principal prove but-for causation.