FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W233415272> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W233415272 startingPage "1009" @default.
• W233415272 abstract "INTRODUCTIONSection 65 of the Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment refers the defence of change of position in a claim for unjust enrichment.1 The section provides, If receipt of a benefit has led a recipient without notice change position in such manner that an obligation make restitution of the original benefit would be inequitable the recipient, the recipient's liability in restitution is that extent reduced.2In England, when the defence of change of position was first explicitly recognised, it was stated in very similar terms. The case which recognised the defence in England was Lipkin Gorman v. Karpnale Ltd.3 In that case change of position was described as a defence available to a person whose position has so changed that it would be inequitable in all the circumstances require him make restitution.4The leading statement of the defence in both U.S. and English law expresses the defence's focus at this extremely abstract level of inequitability. But does not operate at large. In particular, the English courts have recently, and rapidly, developed a considerable number of rules relating applicability of the change-of-position defence claims based on unjust enrichment. As the reporter's note (a) Restatement (Third) section 65 observed of the defence's development in English law, [T]he belated discovery of a general defense of change of position has been the occasion for a much fuller examination of its definition and basic principles than it has ever received in U.S. courts.5This Article utilises the explosion in English case law explain what is meant by the notion of and what it tells us about the nature of the defence of change of position. In English law, the defence of change of position is sometimes referred as a defence of disenrichment. The thesis of this Article is that establishing disenrichment is a necessary but not sufficient requirement the defence. As the rules concerning change of position begin coalesce in England, the picture that has emerged is that a defendant must prove that any disenrichment is unjust.This Article is divided into three parts. The first Part explains that the foundations of change of position in inequitability do not permit unbridled judicial discretion. Instead, this is manifest in established principles. Recent English law is used explain these principles. Nevertheless, difficult questions relating each and every one of these principles require resolution. These questions can only be answered in a principled way once the concept of inequitability, and the rationale for the defence, is elucidated.The second Part of the Article turns the rationale for the defence. Suggestions that the rationale is of receipt, allocation, disenrichment, or irreversibility are rejected. Although neither disenrichment nor security of receipt are rationales of the defence, disenrichment is, nevertheless, an essential element the defence and security of receipt and loss allocation may be effects of the defence. The rationale is the protection of the defendant's autonomy. The degree of protection for a defendant's autonomy that the courts have chosen is the same degree of protection as that given the claimant's autonomy. This outcome resulted from courts effectively developing change of position in tandem with the rules for the claimant establish a prima facie case. In other words, if a claimant can establish a prima facie claim for unjust enrichment by proving that the defendant has been enriched and that the enrichment is caused by an unjust factor, then a defendant will have a defence of unjust disenrichment if, like the claimant, she can prove (1) that she was disenriched and (2) that the disenrichment was caused by an unjust factor. There is a principled coherence this approach. It could hardly be just for a claimant be able insist upon restitution protect his autonomy and yet deny the same protection the autonomy of the defendant. …" @default.
• W233415272 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W233415272 creator A5033174197 @default.
• W233415272 date "2012-05-01" @default.
• W233415272 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W233415272 title "Change of Position: A Defence of Unjust Disenrichment" @default.
• W233415272 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W233415272 type Work @default.
• W233415272 sameAs 233415272 @default.
• W233415272 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W233415272 countsByYear W2334152722014 @default.
• W233415272 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W233415272 hasAuthorship W233415272A5033174197 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C11620315 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C14042566 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C198082294 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C2778392301 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C2778447849 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C2778979077 @default.
• W233415272 hasConcept C2779913896 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C10138342 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C11620315 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C121955636 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C14042566 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C144133560 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C17744445 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C198082294 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C199539241 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C2777834853 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C2778392301 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C2778447849 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C2778979077 @default.
• W233415272 hasConceptScore W233415272C2779913896 @default.
• W233415272 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W233415272 hasLocation W2334152721 @default.
• W233415272 hasOpenAccess W233415272 @default.
• W233415272 hasPrimaryLocation W2334152721 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W1567449300 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W1588112365 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W1750197552 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2013196653 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2033100292 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2044467482 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2114400963 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2223080474 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2263345900 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2268936173 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2287046546 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W246600523 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2525910248 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2568768373 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W2904841792 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W291072559 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W298787248 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W3023551780 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W3123837074 @default.
• W233415272 hasRelatedWork W313802235 @default.
• W233415272 hasVolume "92" @default.
• W233415272 isParatext "false" @default.
• W233415272 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W233415272 magId "233415272" @default.
• W233415272 workType "article" @default.