2019Edward Elgar Publishing eBooksRequires access

Restitution

Peter Jaffey

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Restitution is generally understood as the return of a payment or transfer, or more broadly the removal of a benefit from the defendant. In modern times, restitution has come to be understood as a remedy for unjust enrichment and the law of restitution has become closely associated with or even equated with the law of unjust enrichment. This has heavily influenced how restitution is understood and when it is available, and it has involved re-interpreting parts of the common law. This chapter considers what is meant by restitution and outlines and criticises the unjust enrichment approach to restitution. In particular, it considers the role of unjust enrichment in contractual and property contexts and whether the claim for restitution in these contexts is not more fruitfully understood purely as a remedy in contract law or property law rather than unjust enrichment. It also considers and criticises the category of ‘restitution for wrongs’.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Restitution is generally understood as the return of a payment or transfer, or more broadly the removal of a benefit from the defendant. In modern times, restitution has come to be understood as a remedy for unjust enrichment and the law of restitution has become closely associated with or even equated with the law of unjust enrichment. This has heavily influenced how restitution is understood and when it is available, and it has involved re-interpreting parts of the common law. This chapter considers what is meant by restitution and outlines and criticises the unjust enrichment approach to restitution. In particular, it considers the role of unjust enrichment in contractual and property contexts and whether the claim for restitution in these contexts is not more fruitfully understood purely as a remedy in contract law or property law rather than unjust enrichment. It also considers and criticises the category of ‘restitution for wrongs’.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Restitution is generally understood as the return of a payment or transfer, or more broadly the removal of a benefit from the defendant. In modern times, restitution has come to be understood as a remedy for unjust enrichment and the law of restitution has become closely associated with or even equated with the law of unjust enrichment. This has heavily influenced how restitution is understood and when it is available, and it has involved re-interpreting parts of the common law. This chapter considers what is meant by restitution and outlines and criticises the unjust enrichment approach to restitution. In particular, it considers the role of unjust enrichment in contractual and property contexts and whether the claim for restitution in these contexts is not more fruitfully understood purely as a remedy in contract law or property law rather than unjust enrichment. It also considers and criticises the category of ‘restitution for wrongs’.

Key concepts: Restitution, Unjust enrichment, Property (philosophy), Law, Law and economics, Political science, Economics, Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Restitution — Research Paper | ScholarLens