LITA NASYITAH GOH BINTI ABDULLAH v 1. ) ROSLAN BIN A. GHAFFAR 2. ) BIMBINGAN GALAKAN SDN BHD

wa-22ncvc-278-05-2018 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 12 November 2025 • WA-22NCvC-278-05/2018 • 14 min read

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (5)

Parties (3)

Case Significance

Illustrates the equitable-compensation measure for a trustee's breach of trust, where damages restore the value of the trust property assessed at arm's-length market price without regard to causation, foreseeability or remoteness, with a substantial general-damages award reflecting the trustee's concealment and prolonged denial.

This High Court decision is an assessment of damages following an earlier judgment, upheld by the Court of Appeal, that the first defendant had committed a breach of trust. The plaintiff had been a director and chief executive of a company running a private international school, and the first defendant, its chairman and a shareholder, had declared by a trust deed that he held 50,000 of his shares on trust for the plaintiff, a trust confirmed by a power of attorney. The breach arose when the first defendant sold and transferred all his shares, including the 50,000 shares held on trust, to the second defendant, then concealed the sale and refused to disclose the consideration he had received. The court's task was to value the 50,000 shares and to assess damages for the breach of trust. It accepted that damages for breach of trust are assessed as equitable compensation, which differs from common-law damages in that considerations of causation, foreseeability and remoteness do not apply, because the trustee's obligation is to restore the trust estate or its value; the defaulting trustee bears the full losses of failing to restore the property. Valuing the shares by reference to market price — the price paid by unrelated parties in an arm's-length transaction, drawing on a transaction with a public-listed purchaser in the public domain — the court fixed the value of the 50,000 shares at RM471,500. Taking into account that the first defendant had denied the trust, acted in blatant breach, and dragged the plaintiff through more than seven years of litigation while still refusing to disclose the sale price, the court awarded general damages of RM1,000,000, with interest at 5% per annum on the total judgment sum of RM1,471,500 from the date of the earlier judgment, and costs of RM20,000. The judgment illustrates the equitable-compensation measure for a trustee's breach of trust.

Summary

The Court assessed damages after a finding of breach of trust by the 1st Defendant who sold 50,000 shares held on trust for the plaintiff in Straits International Education Group. The Court valued the shares at RM471,500 based on the market price paid by an arm's-length purchaser (a public-listed company), and awarded RM1 million in general damages for the 1st Defendant's prolonged refusal to make restitution since 2015.

How were damages for the breach of trust assessed?

As equitable compensation, which unlike common-law damages does not turn on causation, foreseeability or remoteness because the trustee must restore the trust estate or its value; the court valued the 50,000 trust shares at market price (RM471,500) and awarded general damages of RM1,000,000, with 5% interest on the total of RM1,471,500 and costs of RM20,000.

What conduct did the court take into account in fixing general damages?

The court weighed that the first defendant had surreptitiously sold the trust shares, concealed the sale and refused to disclose the consideration, denied the trust, and dragged the plaintiff through more than seven years of litigation, including a meritless appeal, still refusing to disclose the sale price at the assessment stage.

Statutes Cited

Rules of Court 2012

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (wa-22ncvc-278-05-2018)