Category Archives: Unjust enrichment

Leow and Liau, ‘Birksian Themes and Their Impact in England and Singapore: Three Points of Divergence’

ABSTRACT This article evaluates the impact of Birksian themes through a comparative lens. It is shown how, unlike the English courts, the Singaporean courts have accepted ‘lack of consent’ as an unjust factor, held that actions for restitution of mistaken , being based on unjust enrichment, fall outside the scope of the Limitation Act, and […]

Mitchell McInnes, ‘Illegality and Unjust Enrichment’

ABSTRACT Within private law, the defence of illegality has long been a source of confusion and injustice. The problems have been particularly acute within the law of unjust enrichment. The pendulum has swung from one extreme to another. During the 19th century. an unforgiving conception of illegality defeated restitutionary claims on the basis of relatively […]

Andrew Botterell, ‘Private law, public right, and the law of unjust enrichment’

ABSTRACT Unjust enrichment continues to fascinate and frustrate. While it is clear that unjust enrichment is a form of private law liability distinct from that found in property, contract, or tort, it remains stubbornly difficult to articulate its underlying normative basis. In this paper I suggest that some headway can be made on this problem […]

John Rimmer, ‘Smith and Philpott v Athol Administration Limited and others, the Milewood Purpose Trust (2021), CHP2020/93′

ABSTRACT A body of case law has now developed in relation to the well-known jurisdiction of common law courts to intervene in voluntary dispositions where they are made on the basis of a serious mistake. But what about the situation where some consideration has been given for the disposition? Does the existence of significant, or […]

Smith and Beswick, ‘Unjust Enrichment: Principle or Cause of Action?’

ABSTRACT Despite a continuing stream of case law from all levels of Canada’s judiciary, there remain fundamental questions regarding the nature of unjust enrichment in Canada and the relationship between unjust enrichment and other private law causes of action. There is a view that unjust enrichment is a general principle that is expressed in a […]

Lionel Smith, ‘Unjust enrichment’

“The law of unjust enrichment is something of a lost child in every legal system. In a wide range of situations, the law requires that a defendant who has been enriched at the expense of a plaintiff make restitution to that plaintiff, either by returning the very substance of the enrichment, or, more often, by […]

Kristofer Petersen-Overton, ‘Perpetuation as perpetration: Wrongful benefit and responsibility for historical injustice’

ABSTRACT Do those of us living in the present have an obligation to rectify injustices committed by others in the distant past? This article is an attempt to revisit the problem of historical injustice by bringing together recent work on structural injustice in relation to the problem of wrongful benefit. The problem of benefitting from […]

Titilola Hameed, ‘The Law of Restitution: for the Attention of the Legal Scholarship in Nigeria’

ABSTRACT The law of restitution is an aspect of law that works at reversing a benefit wrongly gained by a recipient. Such wrongly derived benefits may arise out of unearned monies paid for goods sold or services rendered; or in situations where gains are derived under mistake, misrepresentation, undue influence, or other factors capable of […]

Lee and Yeung, ‘Reconsidering the “Conduit Pipe” Defence to Unjust Enrichment Claims for Intermediary Recipients’

“Addressing claims against intermediary recipients of defrauded or mistakenly transferred funds, such as banks or financial institutions that subsequently transmit the funds onwards, has always been a difficult issue in the law of restitution. Recently, the Hong Kong High Court in Akbank TAS v Mainford Ltd and Others (Akbank) relied on Australian jurisprudence to recognize […]

‘No unjust enrichment claim for total failure of consideration where valid contract’

“A judge was right to dismiss an unjust enrichment claim when it contradicted the express terms of a valid share purchase agreement. This case is about the principle of unjust enrichment where there is an alleged total failure of consideration. It was ‘set in the context of bitter litigation … surrounding the division of the […]