{"id":17,"date":"2021-04-12T14:25:44","date_gmt":"2021-04-12T21:25:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/beswick\/?page_id=17"},"modified":"2024-06-19T14:37:07","modified_gmt":"2024-06-19T21:37:07","slug":"restitution","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/beswick\/restitution\/","title":{"rendered":"Restitution \u2013 Unjust Enrichment"},"content":{"rendered":"

LAW 436 Course Description\"LAW436<\/a><\/h2>\n

The law of obligations concerns the legal rights and duties owed between people. Three primary categories make up the common law of obligations: tort (wrongs), contract (agreements), and unjust enrichment (unjustified gains). The law of unjust enrichment steps in when transactions go awry\u2014when a defendant gains a benefit to the detriment of a plaintiff, and \u201cthere is no reason in law or justice for the defendant\u2019s retention of the benefit conferred by the plaintiff\u201d (Kerr v. Baranow<\/em>, 2011 SCC 10, [2011] 1 SCR 269, [40]). Restitution\u2014reversing the transaction\u2014is the typical response to unjust enrichment.<\/p>\n

This third category of the law of obligations is significant to all sorts of civil disputes\u2014especially in the areas of mistaken payments or benefits, the division of family property, and failed commercial transactions. It is rapidly being developed in contemporary case law and scholarship. Yet, the law of unjust enrichment and restitution is often overlooked and misunderstood by lawyers. The objective of this course is to provide students with an understanding of the essential legal doctrine and controversies as they exist both in the classroom and courtroom.<\/p>\n

Learning Objectives<\/h2>\n