Contract Law - Week 22B Lecture Restitution and Unjust Enrichment Unjust enrichment · What happens if money is transferred or services are provided, in the expectation of a contract which does not materialise or which 'fails'? . How does the law prevent the recipient of the money or service from being 'unjustly enriched?” . If C had paid money to the defendant and received nothing in return, or provided services for nothing in return, then the claimant can sue for restitution . The cause of action to recover the enrichment of money or services upon the defendant is not breach of contract, it is unjust enrichment . Restitutionary damages rest upon breach, and differ from 'restitution to reverse unjust enrichment' · If a contract is still subsisting (on going) , then no action in unjust enrichment can lie. · C can claim if paid money to D and received nothing in return . The contract must be discharged - either as a result of frustration, or through termination due to a breach of contract, or the contract might be void or not have been formed. Principle is open to criticism because in such cases secondary obligation to pay damages still remains · Money might have been paid by mistake or because of undue pressure . In these situations, there is scope for unjust enrichment to operate as the contract is no longer subsisting. . This reasoning is open to criticism in the context of contracts terminated for breach. When does an obligation for unjust enrichment arise? . If a defendant is enriched, At the expense of the claimant, unjustly and in the absence for a legally recognised defence Unjust enrichment on the grounds of failure of consideration · The most important ground of restitution when analysing the remedies available in the present context is 'total failure of consideration'. . Where a claimant transfers a benefit to a defendant on a consideration, or basis, which totally fails, then restitution for unjust enrichment is possible. . When refer to consideration here means the basis or condition upon which the benefit was transferred - failure of the basis that makes the retention of the benefit to be judged as unjust · Consideration in the context of unjust enrichment means simply the basis or condition on which the benefit was transferred. · Fibrosa Spolka Ackyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd [1943]: . "It is clear that any civilized system of law is bound to provide remedies for cases of what has been called unjust enrichment, or unjust benefit, that is, to prevent a man from retaining the money of, or some benefit derived from, another which it is against conscience that he should keep." - to protect a
man from retaining some benefit derived from another which It is against conscience that he should keep . Crown Prosecution Services v Eastenders Group [2014] "failure of consideration" is more familiar. When will the cause of action for total failure of consideration be advantageous when