- Title Pages
- Dedication
- Preface
- Outline Contents
- Table of Cases
- Table of Statutes
- 1 The Essence of Restitution
- 2 Themes and Controversies
- 3 The Principle of Unjust Enrichment
- 4 Enrichment
- 5 At the Expense of the Claimant
- 6 Principles Underlying the Recognition of the Grounds of Restitution
- 7 Ignorance
- 8 Mistake
- 9 Compulsion
- 10 Exploitation
- 11 Necessity
- 12 Failure of Consideration
- 13 Incapacity
- 14 Restitution from Public Authorities
- 15 General Principles
- 16 Restitution for Torts
- 17 Restitution for Breach of Contract
- 18 Restitution for Equitable Wrongdoing
- 19 Criminal Offences
- 20 Establishing Proprietary Restitutionary Claims
- 21 Restitutionary Claims and Remedies to Vindicate Property Rights
- 22 The Defence of <i>Bona Fide</i> Purchase
- 23 Fundamental Principles and General Bars
- 24 Defences Arising from Changes in the Defendant's Circumstances
- 25 Passing On and Mitigation of Loss
- 26 Illegality
- 27 Incapacity
- 28 Limitation Periods and Laches
- Bibliography
- Index
The Principle of Unjust Enrichment
The Principle of Unjust Enrichment
- Chapter:
- (p.51) 3 The Principle of Unjust Enrichment
- Source:
- The Principles of the Law of Restitution
- Author(s):
Graham Virgo
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
Although the unjust enrichment principle often operates positively, in the sense that the claimant must establish that the defendant has been unjustly enriched before restitution is available, sometimes the principle may operate negatively. This is because restitutionary relief may be awarded to prevent the defendant from becoming unjustly enriched. Even though the unjust enrichment principle has been clearly recognised at the highest level, the place of that principle within the law of obligations and the function of the principle still require careful justification. A number of commentators have suggested that restitutionary liability should be based on some other theoretical foundation, including proprietary theory, no unifying principle of unjust enrichment, and unconscientious retention. Possible functions of the unjust enrichment principle are discussed, namely, the formulaic function and the normative function. The approach adopted by England with respect to the function of the unjust enrichment principle is also considered.
Keywords: unjust enrichment, restitution, proprietary theory, unconscientious retention, formulaic function, normative function, England, law of obligations
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
- Title Pages
- Dedication
- Preface
- Outline Contents
- Table of Cases
- Table of Statutes
- 1 The Essence of Restitution
- 2 Themes and Controversies
- 3 The Principle of Unjust Enrichment
- 4 Enrichment
- 5 At the Expense of the Claimant
- 6 Principles Underlying the Recognition of the Grounds of Restitution
- 7 Ignorance
- 8 Mistake
- 9 Compulsion
- 10 Exploitation
- 11 Necessity
- 12 Failure of Consideration
- 13 Incapacity
- 14 Restitution from Public Authorities
- 15 General Principles
- 16 Restitution for Torts
- 17 Restitution for Breach of Contract
- 18 Restitution for Equitable Wrongdoing
- 19 Criminal Offences
- 20 Establishing Proprietary Restitutionary Claims
- 21 Restitutionary Claims and Remedies to Vindicate Property Rights
- 22 The Defence of <i>Bona Fide</i> Purchase
- 23 Fundamental Principles and General Bars
- 24 Defences Arising from Changes in the Defendant's Circumstances
- 25 Passing On and Mitigation of Loss
- 26 Illegality
- 27 Incapacity
- 28 Limitation Periods and Laches
- Bibliography
- Index
