The Varieties Of Restitution

The law of restitution is commonly described in terms of a unifying principle of "unjust enrichment at the plaintiffs expense." Jackman challenges that view, revealing that much of the law of restitution does not concern cases where the defendant has been "enriched" or where the plaintiff has suffered "expense." Demonstrating that there are several distinct concepts of "injustice" at stake, he then identifies three fundamentally distinct categories of legal thought in this area: the reversal of non-voluntary transactions; the fulfilment of non-contractual promises; and the protection of the private legal facilities of proprietary rights and fiduciary relationships. In so doing, the author highlights the central and disparate principles of restitution so often masked by the concern for uniformity.

Over the past decade, the High Court has repeatedly rejected the notion that there is a unifying principle of unjust enrichment at the plaintiff's expense, in contrast to the position in the UK. This book provides a vigorous and sustained justification for the Australian position, and demonstrates that the law in the UK has generated more fictions than it was ever thought to abolish. The law of restitution is shown to comprise several fundamentally distinct legal concepts which fill gaps in the law of contract and tort, and which have nothing in common beyond the historical accident that they arose out of the action of indebitatus assumpsit. These are (i) the recovery of non-voluntary payments (by mistake, duress, undue influence, unconscionable dealing and total failure of consideration); (ii) remuneration for goods or services requested by the defendant in circumstances indicating a promise to pay for them; and (iii) the protection of certain facilitative institutions of private law (such as private property and fiduciary relationships). The book staunchly defends the traditional common law approach of analysing legal principles by the empirical method of treating like cases alike, rather than by derivation from supposedly unifying theories. This edition updates the first edition, which was published in 1998, in the light of almost 20 years of case-law and academic debate. It also adds a separate chapter dealing with the history of the law of restitution and why it matters.

Religious repression--the non-violent suppression of civil and political rights--is a growing and global phenomenon. Though most often practiced in authoritarian countries, levels of religious repression nevertheless vary across a range of non-democratic regimes, including illiberal democracies and competitive authoritarian states. In The Varieties of Religious Repression, Ani Sarkissian argues that seemingly benign regulations and restrictions on religion are tools that non-democratic leaders use to repress independent civic activity, effectively maintaining their hold on power. Sarkissian examines the interaction of political competition and the structure of religious divisions in society, presenting a theory of why religious repression varies across non-democratic regimes. She also offers a new way of understanding the commonalties and differences of non-democratic regimes by focusing on the targets of religious repression. Drawing on quantitative data from more than one hundred authoritarian states, as well as case studies of sixteen countries from around the world, Sarkissian explores the varieties of repression that states impose on religious expression, association, and political activities, describing the obstacles these actions present for democratization, pluralism, and the development of an independent civil society.

Recent leading cases have demonstrated the urgent need to modernize the learning on breach of trust,which has lagged behind the flourishing scholarship on the creation of trusts. Since breach of trust or fiduciary duty occupies the centre of the legal stage, it comes as a surprise that, although one or two novelists have chosen 'Breach of Trust' as the title to their book, no lawyer has so far thought it necessary to produce a specialized work on the subject. To fill the gap, this book, written by a team of leading trust lawyers from a number of common law jurisdictions, investigates all the principal aspects of the subject. The nature of the trustee's duties and of the liability for breach is closely examined, and all available defences and excuses are reviewed. Two substantial chapters consider the consequences of assisting a breach or receiving trust property from a trustee acting in breach. The book closes with a critical overview of the entire topic. CONTENTS: 1 Robert Chambers 'Liability for Breach'; 2 Joshua Getzler 'The Duty of Care'; 3 Edwin Simpson 'The Conflict of Interest'; 4 David Fox 'Overreaching'; 5 Lionel Smith 'Property Transferred in Breach'; 6 Charles Mitchell 'Assistance'; 7 Peter Birks 'Receipt'; 8 James Penner 'Exemption clauses'; 9 John Lowry and Rod Edmunds 'Honest and Reasonable Breach' ; 10 Jennifer Payne 'Consent'; 11 William Swadling 'Limitation'; 12 Gary Watt 'Laches, Estoppel and Election'; 13 David Hayton 'An Overview'.

This book examines claims involving unjust enrichment and public bodies in France,England and the EU. Part 1 explores the law as it now stands in England and Wales as a result of cases such as Woolwich EBS v IRC, those resulting from the decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Metallgesellschaft and Hoechst v IRC and those involving Local Authority swaps transactions. So far these cases have been viewed from either a public or a private law perspective, whereas in fact both branches of the law are relevant, and the author argues that the courts ought not to lose sight of the public law issues when a claim is brought under the private law of unjust enrichment, or vice versa. In order to achieve this a hybrid approach is outlined which would allow the law access to both the public and private law aspects of such cases. Since there has been much discussion, particularly in the context of public body cases, of the relationship between the common law and civilian approaches to unjust enrichment, or enrichment without cause, Part 2 considers the French approach in order to ascertain what lessons it holds for England and Wales. And finally, as the Metallgesellschaft case itself makes clear, no understanding of such cases can be complete without an examination of the relevant EU law. Thus Part 3 investigates the principle of unjust enrichment in the European Union and the division of labour between the European and the domestic courts in the ECJ's so-called 'remedies jurisprudence'. In particular it examines the extent to which the two relevant issues, public law and unjust enrichment, are defined in EU law, and to what extent this remains a task for the domestic courts. Cited with approval in the Court of Appeal by Beatson, LJ in Hemming and others v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster, [2013] EWCA Civ 5912 Cited with approval in the Supreme Court by Lord Walker, in Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation (Appellants) v Commissioners of Inland Revenue and another [2012] UKSC 19

This inter-disciplinary volume brings together scholars from across the globe to challenge the dominant position of unjust enrichment and suggest more satisfactory alternatives. Rethinking Unjust Enrichment includes a broad range of voices from the UK, US, Australia, Canada, China, Singapore, Germany, Ireland, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and South America. The book includes voices of sceptics who think that the current unjust enrichment doctrine must be seriously qualified and others who think that it should be eliminated altogether. The contributions cast doubt on the various parameters of unjust enrichment from an analytical standpoint, representing four interrelated perspectives: history, sociology, doctrine, and theory. The four-limb structure of the book provides readers with a clear understanding of the current problems of unjust enrichment at the deepest levels of its history, sociological forces, doctrinal fallacies, and normative deficiencies. This treatment of the subject serves as the basis for a comprehensive reform across jurisdictions. Comprehensive and multi-faceted, Rethinking Unjust Enrichment is interesting to both sceptics and supporters of the unjust enrichment. It facilitates a critical and constructive dialogue between the two.

Peter Birks's tragically early death, and his immense influence around the world, led immediately to the call for a volume of essays in his honour by scholars who had known him as a colleague, teacher and friend. One such volume, published in 2006, contained essays largely from scholars working in England (Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks, edited by Andrew Burrows and Lord Rodger). This volume contains the essays of those outside England who chose to honour Peter, and appears later than the English volume, reflecting the far flung habitations of its authors. The essays contained in this volume are focussed around the law of unjust enrichment, but are not narrowly preoccupied - instead they move freely from unjust enrichment to some of the most profound questions in private law concerning taxonomy, the relationship between contract, property and unjust enrichment, and the place of remedies within private law. This volume, featuring the work of some of the world's great private lawyers, provides a fitting tribute to a great scholar, and a series of thought-provoking essays inspired by his example. Contributors Kit Barker Michael Bryan Peter Butler Hanoch Dagan Simone Degeling Daniel Friedmann Mark Gergen Ross Grantham Steve Hedley John McCamus Mitchell McInnes Eoin O'Dell Charles Rickett Struan Scott Emily Sherwin Stephen Smith Richard Sutton Michael Tilbury Stephen Waddams Peter Watts Ernest Weinrib Eric Descheemaeker

Private Law and Property Claims sets out a distinctive analysis of some general issues in private law, including the nature of categories such as contract, tort and property, duties and liabilities as the basis of claims in private law, and the relationship between primary rights and remedies. In the light of this analysis, it offers a new approach to property in private law, including claims that arise to protect and recover property. It goes on to discuss the law of trusts, fiduciary relationships, and tracing; the remedial role of the trust; the nature of equity as a legal category; and the relationship between property and claims in tort to protect property. It also exposes the misconceptions underlying the modern approach to restitution and unjust enrichment and the problems this is causing in private law.