Limitation period for unjust enrichment claims, at the claimant’s expense, lack of consent, illegality, and vindication of property rights: Esben Finance Ltd and Others V Wong Hou-Lianq Neil
Even though unjust enrichment has been recognised by English law for several decades, this branch of the law continues to be a highly contested area. Debate rages on with respect to many facets including the formal structure of the subject, the ambit of unjust factors and its relationship with the l...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3970 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | Even though unjust enrichment has been recognised by English law for several decades, this branch of the law continues to be a highly contested area. Debate rages on with respect to many facets including the formal structure of the subject, the ambit of unjust factors and its relationship with the law of property. The decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal in Esben Finance Ltd and Others v Wong Hou-Lianq Neil (‘Esben Finance Ltd’) explores many of these difficult areas. In a wide-ranging judgment, Esben Finance Ltd covers an astonishing variety of issues namely limitation period, at claimant’s expense, illegality, unjust factors and the relationship between unjust enrichment and property law |
|---|