This new edition of Unjust Enrichment by the editor of the Clarendon Law Series, is a fully updated, clear and concise account of the law of unjust enrichment. It attempts to move away from the use of obscure terminology inherited from the past. This text is the first book to insist on the switch from restitution to unjust enrichment, from response to event. It organises modern law around five simple questions: Was the defendant enriched? If so, was it at the claimant's expense? If so, was it unjust? The fourth question is then what kind of right the claimant has, and the fifth is whether the defendant has any defences. This second edition was revised and updated by Peter Birks before his death from cancer on 6 July 2004 at the age of 62. It represents the final thinking of the world's leading authority on the subject.
But I believe that we can penetrate this first , exterior hierarchy and bring to light the values that can be promoted by the various measures of recovery . In this section I reconstruct this “ invisible ” hierarchy of rationales .
Unjust Enrichment
This short book explains clearly and concisely the uses and dangers of the doctrine.
Jones and Birks we have one other 'practitioner work' (The Law of Restitution, edited by Hedley and Halliwell21), three other textbooks (Tettenborn, The Law of Restitution in England and Ireland;22 Virgo, The Principles of the Law of ...
The book explains restitution doctrines, remedies, and defenses with unprecedented clarity and illustrates them with vivid examples.
First, the plaintiff must show that no juristic reason from an established category exists to deny recovery . ... Professor McInnes' (2012) 52 Canadian Business Law Journal 390 (responding to M McInnes, 'A Return to First Principles in ...
' 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.
Wickliffe, 150 S.C. 476, 148 S.E. 476 (1929), Wickliffe demanded payment of $400 on two promissory notes given by Shockley to Wickliffe's deceased father, threatening a lawsuit if payment was not forthcoming. Shockley had already paid ...
Several key issues are considered comparatively in this 2002 book, including grounds for recovery of enrichment, defences, third-party enrichment, as well as proprietary and taxonomic questions.
More accessible but less full are Sir William Evans's remarks on the civilian background in his essay on the action for money had and received which is reprinted in [ 1998 ] Restitution L Rev 1 , 4-5 . 7 Text to n .