Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Restitution and unjust enrichment is the field of law relating to gains-based recovery. In contrast with damages (the law of compensation), restitution is a claim or remedy requiring a defendant to give up benefits wrongfully obtained.
equitable compensation; appointment or removal of fiduciary; interpleader; equitable tracing as a remedy for unjust enrichment; The two main equitable remedies are injunctions and specific performance, and in casual legal parlance references to equitable remedies are often expressed as referring to those two remedies alone. Injunctions may be ...
Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1993] AC 70 is an English unjust enrichment law case, concerning to what extent enrichment of the defendant must be at the expense of the claimant. The case related to tax demands that were later held in judicial review proceedings to be ultra vires, and therefore void.
In trust law, a constructive trust is an equitable remedy imposed by a court to benefit a party that has been wrongfully deprived of its rights due to either a person obtaining or holding a legal property right which they should not possess due to unjust enrichment or interference, or due to a breach of fiduciary duty, which is intercausative with unjust enrichment and/or property interference.
Quantum meruit is a Latin phrase meaning "what one has earned". In the context of contract law, it means something along the lines of "reasonable value of services".. In the United States, the elements of quantum meruit are determined by state common law.
A string of cases in the 1980s saw the High Court of Australia re-affirm the continuing vitality of traditional equitable doctrines. [38] In 2009 the High Court affirmed the importance of equity and dismissed the suggestion that unjust enrichment has explanatory power in relation to traditional equitable doctrines such as subrogation. [39]
Enrichment. The principles of enrichment and expense are more stable in cases of transfers of goods or money, but contested in cases where labour and benefits in kind are passed. This distinction owes its origin to the fact that, historically speaking, these were different kinds of claim. [13] At the claimant's expense. Cases in which a benefit ...
Re Diplock or Chichester Diocesan Fund and Board of Finance Inc v Simpson [1944] AC 341 is an English trusts law and unjust enrichment case, concerning tracing and an action for money had and received.