The Defence of “Change of Position” in English and German Law of Unjust Enrichment

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-46
Author(s):  
Florian Mächtel

In its § 142(1) theAmerican Restatement of the Law of Restitutionprovides that “[t]he right of a person to restitution from another because of a benefit received is terminated or diminished if, after the receipt of the benefit, circumstances have so changed that it would be inequitable to require the other to make full restitution.” The notion that the recipient of an unjustified benefit must in principle return not more than the enrichment that has actually “survived” in his hands, is not only fundamental to the American law of restitution, but can also be found in English and German law.

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 326-337
Author(s):  
Steve Hedley

In this article, Professor Steve Hedley offers a Common Law response to he recently published arguments of Professor Nils Jansen on the German law of unjustified enrichment (as to which, see Jansen, “Farewell to Unjustified Enrichment” (2016) 20 EdinLR 123). The author takes the view that Jansen's paper provided a welcome opportunity to reconsider not merely what unjust enrichment can logically be, but what it is for. He argues that unjust enrichment talk contributes little of value, and that the supposedly logical process of stating it at a high level of abstraction, and then seeking to deduce the law from that abstraction, merely distracts lawyers from the equities of the cases they consider.


2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 471
Author(s):  
Victoria Stace

This article looks at the changes made to the equitable doctrine of contribution by the New Zealand Supreme Court in a 2016 decision, Hotchin v New Zealand Guardian Trust Co Ltd. The approach now favoured by the Supreme Court is that to establish a claim for contribution by one defendant against another, there is no need to find any greater degree of coordination between the liabilities other than that the plaintiff could pursue either defendant for its loss and either would be liable for it, in whole or in part. The underlying rationale is that by paying the plaintiff, the defendant who was pursued not only discharges itself but also discharges the other defendant's liability. If mutual discharge is established, the court then determines the amount of contribution based on what is just and reasonable in the circumstances. The Supreme Court's approach to the doctrine of equitable contribution, which is a significant change to previous law, bears similarities to the approach proposed in the leading text on unjust enrichment, raising the issue of whether a future claim for contribution could be approached using an unjust enrichment analysis.


2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-155
Author(s):  
Zoë Sinel

According to the principle of corrective justice, one who causes a wrongful loss or receives a wrongful gain is obligated to make good that loss or restore that gain. The guiding principle of the remedies of private law (the law of torts, contract, and unjust enrichment) is to put the aggrieved party in the position s/he would have been in had the complained of conduct not occurred. The connection between corrective justice and private law’s remedies thus appears analytic. My article challenges this orthodoxy. I argue that, on the one hand, if corrective justice is treated narrowly, as an exclusively remedial principle, it severs the connection between right and remedy that lies at the heart of the corrective justice theories of private law. On the other, if it is interpreted broadly to encompass as well the parties’ original (pre-wrong or pre-unjust enrichment) relationship, it becomes otiose.


2008 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Grantham ◽  
Charles Rickett

The modern law of unjust enrichment is unique in many respects. In one sense, it is the newest and most significant development in the private law for a very long time. While it can claim ancient roots, as a discrete body of law unjust enrichment has only emerged from the long shadows of the law of contract in the last 20 years. The development and content of the law of unjust enrichment has, to a greater extent than perhaps anywhere else in the private law, been driven and shaped by academic rather than judicial influences. The law of unjust enrichment is also distinguished from the other principal heads of civil obligation in that its focus is on stripping the defendant of gains made rather than making good losses suffered by the plaintiff. Perhaps most controversially, the role or function of unjust enrichment may differ from the other principal parts of the private law in that the source of the entitlement protected is not found within the law of unjust enrichment, but in other areas of the law.


2010 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reiner Arntz

AbstractLinguistic and conceptual differences between legal languages are closely related to the distance between the corresponding legal systems. This is illustrated by a comparison of Anglo-American law texts on the one hand and texts and terminology from continental systems like French and German law on the other hand. Special problems arise in officially multilingual states like Switzerland which has one common legal system and four different legal languages. All legal documents in these languages are considered as original texts, not as translations. The same principle applies to the European Union where all documents have to be absolutely equivalent and linguistically authentic in each of the 23 official languages.


Jurnal Hukum ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 1721
Author(s):  
Muhammad Aziz Syamsuddin

AbstractThe spirit of the eradication of corruption is running continually. Various efforts or strategies were arranged to sharpen the power of corruptions’ eradication. One of the strategies is legislation support or comprehend and effective legislation. It was proved by the enactment of Law No. 28 of 1999 on State Implementation of Clean and Free from Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism and also Law No. 31 of 1999 as amended by Law No. 20 of 2001 on Corruption Eradication. The other related legislation such as Law No. 30 of 2002 on Corruption Eradication Commission and the Law 8 of 2010 on the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering.  Those Supporting legislations show that there is a shared commitment to eradicate corruption. Indonesia has also ratified the UNCAC (United Nations Convention against Corruption) by Law No. 7 of 2006 on the UN Convention (United Nations) Anti-Corruption. Support legislation is expected to provide a deterrent effect for offenders and protecting the rights of citizens has a whole. Keywords: Legislative Support, Criminal Code Draft, Eradication, Crime of Corruption, Pros and Cons    AbstrakSemangat pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi terus bergulir. Berbagai upaya atau strategi dibangun untuk mempertajam kekuatan pemberantasan korupsi. Salah satunya adalah dengan dukungan legislasi atau peraturan perundang-undangan yang komprehensif dan efektif. Dibuktikan dengan lahirnya Undang-Undang No. 28 Tahun 1999 tentang Penyelenggaraan Negara yang Bersih dan Bebas dari Korupsi, Kolusi, dan Nepotisme dan Undang-Undang No. 31 Tahun 1999 sebagaimana diubah dengan Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2001 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Adapun undang-undang terkait lainnya seperti UU No. 30 Tahun 2002 tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi dan UU No. 8 Tahun 2010 tentang Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. Dukungan legislasi tersebut menunjukkan adanya komitmen bersama untuk memberantas tindak pidana korupsi. Indonesia juga  telah meratifikasi UNCAC (United Nations Convention Against Corruption) dengan UU No. 7 Tahun 2006 tentang Konvensi PBB (Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa) Anti Korupsi. Dukungan legislasi ini diharapkan memberikan efek jera bagi pelaku sekaligus melindungi hak-hak warga negara secara keseluruhan. Kata Kunci: Dukungan Legislatif, RUU KUHP, Pemberantasan, Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Pro dan Kontra


Screen Bodies ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 87-91
Author(s):  
Karen Fiss

In California, where I live, an affirmative consent law was recently passed: often referred to as the “yes means yes” standard for sexual assault, it is now required of all colleges receiving state funds. Supporters of the law argue that campus rapists can no longer be exonerated because their victims did not resist or were incapacitated by fear, shame, or intoxication. On the other side of the country, a student at Columbia University became an icon in this ongoing legal struggle by carrying her mattress around with her everywhere, including to her graduation, as a sign of protest against the university’s refusal to expel the male student who raped her.


Author(s):  
William E. Nelson

This volume begins where volumes 2 and 3 ended. The main theme of the four-volume project is that the law of America’s thirteen colonies differed profoundly when they first were founded, but had developed into a common American law by the time of the Revolution. This fourth volume focuses on what was common to the law of Britain’s thirteen North American colonies in the mid-eighteenth century, although it also takes important differences into account. The first five chapters examine procedural and substantive law in colonies and conclude that, except in North Carolina and northern New York, the legal system functioned effectively in the interests both of Great Britain and of colonial localities. The next three chapters examine changes in law and the constitution beginning with the Zenger case in 1735—changes that ultimately culminated in independence. These chapters show how lawyers became leading figures in what gradually became a revolutionary movement. It also shows how lawyers used legal and constitutional ideology in the interests, sometimes of an economic character, of their clients. The book thereby engages prior scholarship, especially that of Bernard Bailyn and John Phillip Reid, to show how ideas and constitutional values possessed independent causal significance in leading up to the Revolution but also served to protect institutional structures and socioeconomic interests that likewise possessed causal significance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document