Restitution — Overview
Publications
Showing all[*] publications sorted by type, then year, author, title [change this]
Showing all 25 Restitution publications currently held in our database
Change to sort them by year | title | name OR
Show only Recent | Selected publications
Journal Articles
2011
Roy Goode, 'Proprietary Liability for Secret Profits - A Reply' (2011) 127 Sweet & Maxwell 493 [...]
A reply to a case note by Justice Hayton on Sinclair Investments (UK) Ltd. v. Versailles Trade Finance Ltd
ISBN: 0023-933X
2008
S Gardner, 'Proprietary Restitution: A Coda to Chapter 8 of Birks? Unjust Enrichment' (2008) Restitution Law Review 107
2005
A S Burrows, 'Unravelling Proprietary Restitution: a Response to Professor Lionel Smith' (2005) Canadian Business Law Journal 424
R Williams, 'The Beginnings of a Public Law of Unjust Enrichment?' (2005) 16(1) King's College Law Journal 194
2000
M Chen-Wishart, '“Unjust Factors and the Restitutionary response” ' (2000) 20 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 557
1994
M Chen-Wishart, 'Undue Influence, Manifest Disadvantage and Loss Apportionment' (1994) 110 Law Quarterly Review 173
1990
J S Getzler, 'Unconscionable Conduct and Unjust Enrichment as Grounds for Judicial Intervention' (1990) 16 Monash University Law Review 283
Books
2010
R Williams, Unjust Enrichment and Public Law: A comparative study of England, France and the EU (Hart Publishing 2010) [...]
Since the decisions in R v IRC ex p Woolwich Equitable Building Society in 1990 and Hazell v Hammersmith and Fulham LBC in 1991, the courts have had, in a variety of contexts, to grapple with the relationship between unjust enrichment, public law and the law of the European Community. 20 years later, the decision of the European Court of Justice in Metallgesellschaft and Hoecsht v IRC in 2001 has led to a further explosion of such cases, many of which are still making their way through the courts. The central aim of this book is to examine such claims in France, England and the EC. The author argues that so far these cases have been viewed from either a public or private law perspective, whereas in fact both branches of the law are relevant, and the courts ought not to lose sight of the public law issues when a claim is brought under the private law of unjust enrichment. Support for this position is drawn from an examination of French law, which demonstrates that neither adoption of the ‘without cause’ approach to unjust enrichment, nor the longer-standing existence of a separate concept of public law removes the necessity for such a hybrid public and private understanding of the cases. Finally, in order to complete the picture the book examines cases where the limit on the public body’s powers derives, not from domestic public law, but from the law of the EC. Thus a further aspect of the book is that it analyses more specifically what is often referred to as the ECJ’s ‘remedies’ jurisprudence in order to investigate the division of labour between the European courts and the domestic courts in defining such claims.
ISBN: 1841134147 / 9781841
2007
A S Burrows, Ewan McKendrick and James Edelman, Cases and Materials on the Law of Restitution, 2nd edition (OUP 2007)
2000
M Chen-Wishart, In Defence of Unjust Factors: A Comparative Study of Duress, Fraud and Exploitation (Oxford U Comparative L Forum 2 at ouclf.iuscomp.org 2000)
Chapters
2012
R Williams, 'A Hybrid Public and Private Approach' in Birke Haecker, Charles Mitchell, Steven Elliott (eds), Restitution of Overpaid Taxes ( 2012) (forthcoming) [...]
Continues the argument developed in 'Unjust Enrichment and Public law' in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in FII. Argues that in Deutsche Morgan Grenfell the House of Lords took a wrong turning on the law of unjust enrichment in a public law context, a decision which has led to unnecessary and avoidable litigation, as evidenced by FII. Suggests that such litigation could in future be avoided by reversing the Deutsche Morgan Grenfell decision and adopting the hybrid public and private approach to cases of unjust enrichment involving public bodies.
2006
A S Burrows, 'Absence of Basis: the New Birksian Scheme' in Andrew Burrows and Alan Rodger (eds), Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (OUP 2006) [...]
Essay analysing the advantages and disadvantages of Birks' new approach to the unjust question in unjust enrichment.
ISBN: 0-19-920655-4
M Chen-Wishart, 'Undue Influence: Beyond Impaired Consent and Wrong-Doing, Towards a Relational Analysis' in Andrew Burrows and Alan Rodger (eds), Mapping the Law: Essays in Honour of Peter Birks (OUP 2006)
2004
A S Burrows, 'The English Law of Restitution: A Ten-Year Review' in Neyers, McInnes and Pitel (eds), Understanding Unjust Enrichment ( 2004)
2002
M Chen-Wishart, 'In Defence of Unjust Factors: a Study of Rescission for Duress, Fraud and Exploitation' in David Johnston and Reinhard Zimmermann (eds), Unjustified Enrichment: Key Issues in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge University Press 2002)
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.
ISBN: 521808200
W J Swadling, 'The Role of Illegality in the English Law of Unjust Enrichment' in D Johnson & R Zimmermann (eds), Unjustified Enrichment - Key Issues in Comparative Perspective (CUP 2002)
2001
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.
ISBN: 90-411-1655-9
Edited books
2006
A S Burrows and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry (co-editor) (eds), Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (OUP 2006) [...]
Essays in memory of Peter Birks
ISBN: 0-19-920655-4
Case Notes
2009
R Williams and R Shiers, 'FII GLO (Chancery) and F J Chalke; tax and restitution developing hand-in-hand' [2009] British Tax Review 365 [...]
The authors examine the recent domestic decisions in the FII Group Litigation Order and F J Chalke, and demonstrate the significance of these taxation cases for the future development of the law of unjust enrichment. They consider in particular the impact of European case law in this area.
Reviews
2004
E Descheemaeker, 'Review of Peter Birks, Unjust Enrichment' (2004) 56 Revue internationale de droit comparé 715
Courses
The courses we offer in this field are:
Postgraduate
BCL
Our taught postgraduate programme, designed to serve outstanding law students from common-law backgrounds
[less]
Restitution of Unjust Enrichment
Restitution of Unjust Enrichment is concerned with about how and when a claimant can compel a defendant to surrender an enrichment gained at the claimant’s expense. Long neglected, the subject has in recent years been one of the most exciting in the postgraduate curriculum. It draws its cases from areas of the law which have resisted rational analysis, largely because they have tenaciously preserved the language of an earlier age.
Common lawyers found themselves unable to escape from money had and received, money paid, and quantum meruit, while those on the chancery side became defensively fond of the unsolved mysteries of tracing and trusts arising by operation of law. In the result, down to earth questions about getting back money and value in other forms have been made to seem much more difficult than they need be. The aim of any course on restitution must be to try to understand what has really been going on and to play back that understanding to the courts in accessible modern language. These aims are helped by keeping an eye on the main lines of civilian solutions to the problems with which the common law has to wrestle.
Note that this course is concerned only with restitution of unjust enrichment. Restitution for wrongs is not part of the course and is dealt with in the Commercial remedies course.
Teaching is through twelve seminars. The seminars are supported by two introductory lectures and by the provision of four tutorials. A detailed account of the course is produced every year in and posted on this site. The subject of every seminar is set out, with a list of cases and other materials to be read, together with questions and problems intended to stimulate thought.
[less]
MJur
Our taught postgraduate programme, designed to serve outstanding law students from civil law backgrounds.
[less]
Restitution of Unjust Enrichment
Restitution of Unjust Enrichment is concerned with about how and when a claimant can compel a defendant to surrender an enrichment gained at the claimant’s expense. Long neglected, the subject has in recent years been one of the most exciting in the postgraduate curriculum. It draws its cases from areas of the law which have resisted rational analysis, largely because they have tenaciously preserved the language of an earlier age.
Common lawyers found themselves unable to escape from money had and received, money paid, and quantum meruit, while those on the chancery side became defensively fond of the unsolved mysteries of tracing and trusts arising by operation of law. In the result, down to earth questions about getting back money and value in other forms have been made to seem much more difficult than they need be. The aim of any course on restitution must be to try to understand what has really been going on and to play back that understanding to the courts in accessible modern language. These aims are helped by keeping an eye on the main lines of civilian solutions to the problems with which the common law has to wrestle.
Note that this course is concerned only with restitution of unjust enrichment. Restitution for wrongs is not part of the course and is dealt with in the Commercial remedies course.
Teaching is through twelve seminars. The seminars are supported by two introductory lectures and by the provision of four tutorials. A detailed account of the course is produced every year in and posted on this site. The subject of every seminar is set out, with a list of cases and other materials to be read, together with questions and problems intended to stimulate thought.
[less]
People
Restitution teaching is organized by a Subject Group convened by:
William Swadling: Reader in Property Law
in conjunction with:
Andrew Burrows, QC: Professor of the Law of England
Mindy Chen-Wishart: Reader in Contract Law
Ewan McKendrick: Registrar
Edwin Peel: Professor of Law
Robert Stevens: Herbert Smith Freehills Professor of English Private Law
Simon Whittaker: Professor of European Comparative Law
Also working in this field, but not involved in its teaching programme:
Tatiana Cutts: DPhil Law student
Derek Davies: Retired. Formerly Fellow and Tutor in Law at St Catherine's
Jodi Gardner: MPhil Law student

