Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Unjust enrichment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Unjust enrichment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This book presents an account of attribution in unjust enrichment. Attribution refers to how and when two parties - a claimant and a defendant - are relevantly connected to each other for unjust enrichment purposes. It is reflected in the familiar expression that a defendant be 'enriched at the claimant's expense'. This book presents a structured account of attribution, consisting of two requirements: first, the identification of an enrichment to the defendant and a loss to the claimant; and, secondly, the identification of a connection between that enrichment and that loss. These two requirements must be kept separate from other considerations often subsumed within the expression 'enrichment at the claimant's expense' which in truth have nothing to do with attribution, and which instead qualify unjust enrichment liability for reasons that should be analysed in their own terms. The structure of attribution so presented fits a normative account of unjust enrichment based upon each party's exchange capacities. A defendant is enriched when he receives something that he has not paid for under prevailing market conditions, while a claimant suffers a loss when he loses the opportunity to charge for something under the same conditions. A counterfactual test - asking whether enrichment and loss arise 'but for' each other - provides the best generalisation for testing whether enrichment and loss are connected, thereby satisfying the requirements of attribution in unjust enrichment

Unjust enrichment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This book examines the role of unjust enrichment in the contractual context, defined as contracts which are (a) terminated for breach, or (b) subsisting, or (c) unenforceable. The book makes three claims in relation to the orthodox common law account of restitution (founded on unjust enrichment) in the contractual context. Firstly, the orthodox account correctly proceeds on the basis that the restitutionary claim in the contractual context is founded on an independent cause of action in unjust enrichment, rather than some equitable notion of unconscientiousness or the law of contract. Secondly, the book departs from the orthodox account by rejecting the unjust factors approach and endorsing the absence of basis approach for the law of unjust enrichment. Finally, the book argues that the right to restitution in the contractual context should be determined by the conditionality of the transfer of the benefit rather than a requirement such as the termination of the contract, as the orthodox account dictates. To that end the book proposes the following model, under which the right to restitution in the contractual context is determined by the resolution of the following two questions: (1) Was the transfer of the benefit (eg of money or services) conditional? (2) Was there a qualifying failure of condition? A condition can be, and often is, the other contracting party's counter-performance, but it may also be an event not promised by either party. What qualifies as a failure of condition depends on the type of contract in question. This book identifies two types of contracts, namely those which are apportioned (eg instalment contracts) and those which are unapportioned. It is only in relation to the latter that termination is required. It is a particular strength of the book that it is underpinned by detailed and original historical analysis which makes a novel and distinct contribution to the history of the laws of unjust enrichment and contract. 'Dr Baloch has produced the definitive study of the inter-relationship between contract and unjust enrichment. This has been achieved by carefully considering the historical roots of our common law, and how this is to be understood in its best light in the modern era.' Robert H Stevens, University College, London. 'Dr Baloch's exploration of the boundary between contractual and unjust enrichment liability in the 17th to 19th centuries has important things to say about the history of ideas of 'contract' in this period.' Mike Macnair, Oxford University. 'This is an innovative and rigorous book which engages with one of the most difficult areas in the law of unjust enrichment, namely the relationship between the law of unjust enrichment and the law of contract. Baloch roots his treatment of the modern law in its history and the historical analysis throughout is very careful and well grounded in the primary sources.' David Ibbetson, Cambridge University. 'This is a valuable book, thoughtful and well researched. It is concerned to build a model that fits comfortably with the cases, and its focus is on the work of modern commentators. Those concerned with the relationship of contract and the law of restitution whether at a theoretical level or in practice will benefit by careful study of what Dr Baloch has to say, whether or not they agree with it.' Jack Beatson, Royal Courts of Justice, 14 February 2009 (From the foreword)

Unjust enrichment. --- Unjust enrichment --- Contracts. --- Contracts

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The essays in this volume are dedicated to Gareth Jones, the retiring Downing Professor of English Law at the University of Cambridge. His contribution to legal scholarship has been immense, particularly in the fields of legal history, the law of trusts, charities law and, most famously, the law of restitution. The publication of the first edition of the Law of Restitution, which he co-authored with Lord Goff, stimulated a renaissance in the study of a subject which had previously lain dormant. The effect of its publication on English legal scholarship has been profound and enduring. In these essays, written by a group of the world's leading restitution scholars, the opportunity is taken to conduct a fresh appraisal of the development of the subject - to look, in other words, at the past, present, and future of the law of restitution. Contributors: John Baker, Peter Birks, Justice Finn, Roy Goode, Ewan McKendrick, Justice McLachlin, Sir Peter Millett, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Richard Nolan, Janet O'Sullivan, Graham Virgo (as well as shorter contributions from invited commentators)

Restitution --- Unjust enrichment