T Krebs, 'Yearworth and the Law of Contract' (2012) Journal of Medical Ethics Special Issue - Human Body Parts/Property
T Krebs, 'Harmonisation and how not to do it: agency in the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts 2004' (2009) Lloyds Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly 57
T Krebs, Restitution at the Crossroads: a comparative study (Cavendish 2001)
Robert Freitag and others, 'Representation' in Stefan Vogenauer, Gerhard Dannemann (eds), European Contract Law and the 'Common Frame of Reference' (Oxford University Press 2012)
T Krebs, 'Agency Law for Muggles: Why There is no Magic in Agency' in Andrew Burrows, Edwin Peel (eds), Contract Formation and Parties (Oxford University Press 2010)
T Krebs, 'Art. 2, Section 2: Authority of agents' in Stefan Vogenauer, Jan Kleinheisterkamp (eds), Commentary on the Principles of European Commercial Contracts (PICC) (Oxford University Press 2009)
T Krebs, 'The Fallacy of Restitution for Wrongs' in Andrew Burrows and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry (eds), Mapping the Law, Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (OUP 2006)
T Krebs, 'Eingriffskondiktion und Restitution for Wrongs im englischen Recht' in Reinhard Zimmermann (ed), Grundstrukturen eines Europäischen Bereicherungsrechts (Mohr Siebeck e.K. 2005) [...]
English law distinguishes sharply between restitutionary claims following an unjust enrichment and claims seeking restitution of benefits obtained by committing a wrong against the claimant. The latter are now generally regarded as part of the law of wrongs. German law draws a similar line between enrichments obtained by a conscious transfer of assets from one person to another (Leistungskondiktion) and enrichments obtained ‘in another way’, often by infringing the claimant’s rights, be they proprietary or otherwise (Eingriffskondiktion). However, in contrast to English law, both claims form part of the wider law of unjustified enrichment. German writers have developed a set of criteria used to determine whether the infringement of a given right triggers a restitutionary claim. These are based on the content and purpose of the infringed right. The claim of the article is that English law would do well to follow the German lead by (a) integrating restitution for wrongs into the law of unjust enrichment and (b) developing a similar set of criteria.
T Krebs, 'Unrequested Benefits in German Law' in Neyers, McInnes, Pitel (eds), Understanding Unjust Enrichment (Hart Publishing 2004)
T Krebs, 'In defence of unjust factors' in Johnston and Zimmermann (eds), Unjustified Enrichment - Key Issues in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge University Press 2002) [...]
Comparative essay rejecting suggestions that English law should adopt the German 'lack of legal cause' approach to enrichment liability.
T Krebs, 'Stable Claims and Stable Defences - Change of Position and Disenrichment in England and Germany' in E.J.H. Schrage (ed), Unjust Enrichment and the Law of Contract (Kluwer Law 2001) [...]
A comparative essay resisting suggestions that the defence of change of position in England should be restrictively applied.
T Krebs, 'Review of Busch, D (ed.) The Unauthorised Agent: Perspectives from European and Comparative Law' (2011) Lloyds Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly 152
T Krebs, 'Review of Watts, P, Bowstead & Reynolds on Agency (19th ed.) and Munday, RJC, Agency: Law and Principles' (2011) Restitution Law Review 272
Oxford OX1 4AJ