Restitution and unjust enrichment What happens when a contract 'fails'? What happens if services are provided, or money transferred, in the expectation of a contract which doesn't materialise, or which 'fails'? How does the law prevent the recipient of the service or money from being 'unjustly enriched'? Recovery of money Total failure of consideration cf Fibrosa case re frustration Rowland v Divall (1923) Butterworth v Kingsway Motors (1954) Stocznia Gdanska SA v Latvian Shipping Co (1998) Mistake of Fact Must be a legal, or moral, obligation to pay if the fact had been true - Aiken v Short (1856) Larner v LCC (1949) Application to insurance contracts Norwich Union Fire Insurance Society Ltd v Price Ltd (1934) No recovery where recipient has "changed position" in reliance on payment Lloyds Bank plc v Independent Insurance Co Ltd (1999) Mistake of Law Old position - "ignorance of law is no excuse" Changed by Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council (1999) Payment to Third Party Claimant must have been acting not simply as a 'volunteer' Macclesfield Corporation v Great Central Railway (1911) Exall v Partridge (1799) Metropolitan Police District Receiver v Croydon Corp (1957) Recovery for benefit supplied Contract broken Planché v Colburn (1831) Contract void Mohammed v Alaga (1999) Agreement never reached British Steel Corp v Cleveland Bridge and Engineering (1984) Preventing Unjust Enrichment following breach of contract Surrey v Bredero Homes (1993) Wrotham Park Estate v Parkside Homes (1974) Attorney General v Blake (2001) Esso Petroleum v Niad (2001) Experience Hendrix LLC v PPX Enterprises (2003) WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature v World Wrestling Federation (2007) Next week:
Drafting effective contracts Feedback on assignment