Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqq024
| Title: | Correcting unjust enrichments | Authors: | Simester, A.P. | Issue Date: | 2010 | Citation: | Simester, A.P. (2010). Correcting unjust enrichments. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 30 (3) : 579-598. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqq024 | Abstract: | This review article examines R Chambers, C Mitchell and J Penner (eds), Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Unjust Enrichment. These sophisticated essays suggest that a corrective, bipolar analysis of autonomous unjust enrichment is broadly right. However, the normative rationale is complex. From the plaintiff's perspective, there are autonomy-based grounds for drawing an analogy to voidable rather than void property transactions. For similar reasons, the role of a corresponding-enrichment requirement primarily concerns identification of the defendant rather than establishing injustice. © The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. | Source Title: | Oxford Journal of Legal Studies | URI: | http://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/45403 | ISSN: | 01436503 | DOI: | 10.1093/ojls/gqq024 |
| Appears in Collections: | Staff Publications |
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
SCOPUSTM
Citations
4
checked on Jun 20, 2022
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
3
checked on Jun 20, 2022
Page view(s)
268
checked on Jun 23, 2022
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.