Unjustified Enrichment Flashcards
(13 cards)
4 key requirements for an unjustified enrichment claim in scots law
- enrichment of the defender
- at the pursuer’s expense
- no legal ground for justification
- equity justifies restitution
Define Condictio Indebiti
For the recovery of undue payments or benefits made in error about legal liability
Morgan Guaranty Trust v Lothian RC
Condictio Indebiti
KF: Bank made payments under a contract that was later found out to be void due to lack of contractual capacity on the part of the council
EoD: Recovery possible because payments were made in good faith
Findlay v Monro
Condictio donandi causa
KF: The pursuer gave an ox intended as a gift to a specific person but mistakenly to wrong person
EoD: Benefit intended as a gift can be recovered
A gift can be erecliamed when donative purpose failed
Define Condictio Donandi Causa
for failed gifts e.g. delivered to wrong person
Define condictio ob turpem vel iniustam causam
for recovering benefits given for illegal or immoral purposes
Condictio Causa Data Causa Non Secuta
when a benefit was given for a non-contractual future purpose that fails (e.g. engagement)
requires agreement or shared understanding
Shilliday v Smith
Condictio Causa Data Causa Non Secuta
KF: The pursuer paid for improvements to the defenders house in anticipation of their marriage which ultimately did not take place
EoD: Defender unjustly enriched and recovery allowed
Restitution
return of physical items
repetition
return of money
recompense
value of non returnable benefits (e.g. services)
defence: change of position
the defender can resist repayment if they changed their position in good faith in reliance on the benefit
Wylie’s Executive v McJannet
Change of position
KF: Pursuer sought repayment on rent paid on defenders behalf but defender had already changed his position believing the rent was a gift
EoD: A defender may resist repayment if they reasonably believed entitlement to the enrichment
