Category Archives: Unjust enrichment

Timothy Pilkington, ‘Failure of Condition or Implied Term?’

ABSTRACT In Barton v Gwyn‐Jones the Court of Appeal considered the remedies available to a service provider who performed services pursuant to a contract that expressly stated that they were entitled to payment of a specified sum if the services led to a particular result, but did not expressly state whether the service provider was […]

Yeung and Fee, ‘Limiting the fiduciary’s account of profits: but-for causation?’

ABSTRACT In an account of profits for breach of fiduciary duty, courts have understandably required some form of nexus between the breach and the gains to be disgorged, but have otherwise struggled to articulate a precise test. In the recent case of UVJ v UVH, the Singapore Court of Appeal broke new ground by requiring […]

Ekaterina Pannebakker, Review of Reliance in the Breaking-off of Contractual Negotiations: Trust and Expectation in a Comparative Perspective by Isabel Zuloaga

“Reliance in the Breaking-off of Contractual Negotiations addresses precontractual liability in Germany, France, Chile, England and Wales. The focus of the book is delimited by a ‘paradigm case’ presented in the Preface (xxxiv): commercial parties negotiate a contact but create no preliminary agreements and start no works. If one of the parties breaks off negotiations, […]

Rodney Smith, ‘Tax consequences of setting aside a voidable transaction on the ground of mistake’

ABSTRACT This article considers whether there is, as has been widely assumed until now, a general principle that, if a voidable transaction is avoided by an order of the court (for example, on grounds of mistake or under the Hastings-Bass rule), the order operates retrospectively for all purposes, including fiscal purposes. It discusses whether the […]

Mat Campbell, ‘Doubting the Subsidiarity of Unjust Enrichment’

ABSTRACT Courts and commentators frequently use the noun ‘subsidiarity’ and the adjective ‘subsidiary’ to help explain certain of unjust enrichment’s relations with other areas of law – especially property, contract, and statute. However, the vocabulary of subsidiarity is unsuited for that purpose. It should disappear from unjust enrichment discourse. After a brief introduction, this paper […]

Just Published: Research Handbook on Unjust Enrichment and Restitution (Bant, Barker and Degeling eds)

This comprehensive yet accessible Research Handbook offers an expert guide to the key concepts, principles and debates in the modern law of unjust enrichment and restitution. Written by leading experts drawn from a wide range of common law, civilian and mixed jurisdictions, chapters cover the complex history, scope and philosophical foundations of the subject, its […]

John D McCamus, ‘Moore v Sweet: Four Lessons in Unjust Enrichment from the Supreme Court of Canada’

ABSTRACT The recent decision in Moore v Sweet provided the Supreme Court of Canada with an opportunity to provide valuable guidance concerning the capacity of the unjust enrichment analysis to ground recovery in novel cases. The opportunity was not lost. First, the Court confirmed that resort should be made to the underlying unjust enrichment principle […]

Jonathan Silver, ‘Rethinking Restitution: Will Unjust Enrichment Lawyers Join In?’

ABSTRACT In a recent article Lionel Smith has argued that there is no normative unity in most restitutionary claims that are currently thought of as being part of the law of unjust enrichment. This leads him to conclude that the generally accepted test for unjust enrichment liability is inapplicable with respect to those claims. This […]

Sinéad Agnew, Review of Sanctity of Contracts in a Secular Age: Equity, Fairness and Enrichment by Stephen Waddams

Stephen Waddams, Sanctity of Contracts in a Secular Age: Equity, Fairness and Enrichment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019, 235 pp, hb £85.00. This book reinvigorates the debate about the place of substantive fairness in contract law. Its central argument is that it is time we recognised a general judicial power to relieve against highly unreasonable […]

John McCamus, ‘Moore v Sweet: Four Lessons in Unjust Enrichment from the Supreme Court Of Canada’

ABSTRACT The recent decision in Moore v Sweet provided the Supreme Court of Canada with an opportunity to provide valuable guidance concerning the capacity of the unjust enrichment analysis to ground recovery in novel cases. The opportunity was not lost. First, the Court confirmed that resort should be made to the underlying unjust enrichment principle […]