unjust enrichment


Also found in: Financial, Wikipedia.

Unjust Enrichment

A general equitable principle that no person should be allowed to profit at another's expense without making restitution for the reasonable value of any property, services, or other benefits that have been unfairly received and retained.

Although the unjust enrichment doctrine is sometimes referred to as a quasi-contractual remedy, unjust enrichment is not based on an express contract. Instead, litigants normally resort to the remedy of unjust enrichment when they have no written or verbal contract to support their claim for relief. In such instances litigants ask a court to find a contractual relationship that is implied in law, a fictitious relationship created by courts to do justice in a particular case.

Unjust enrichment has three elements. First, the plaintiff must have provided the defendant with something of value while expecting compensation in return. Second, the defendant must have acknowledged, accepted, and benefited from whatever the plaintiff provided. Third, the plaintiff must show that it would be inequitable or Unconscionable for the defendant to enjoy the benefit of the plaintiff's actions without paying for it. A court will closely examine the facts of each case before awarding this remedy and will deny claims for unjust enrichment that frustrate public policy or violate the law.

In some circumstances unjust enrichment is the appropriate remedy when a formally executed agreement has been ruled unenforceable due to incapacity, mistake, impossibility of performance, or the Statute of Frauds. In certain states, for example, contracts with minors are Voidable at the minor's discretion because persons under the age of majority are deemed legally incapable of entering into contracts. But if the minor has received a benefit from the other party's performance before nullifying the contract, the law of unjust enrichment will require the minor to pay for the fair market value of the benefit received. If the adult used duress or Undue Influence to induce the minor to enter the contract, however, the court will deny recovery in unjust enrichment because the adult lacked "clean hands."

In other circumstances unjust enrichment is the appropriate remedy for parties who have entered a legally enforceable contract, but where performance by one party exceeds the precise requirements of the agreement. For example, suppose a homeowner and a builder have entered into a legally binding contract under which the builder is to construct a two-car garage. One day the owner returns to her residence and discovers that in addition to constructing a two-car garage, the builder has paved the driveway. The owner says nothing about the driveway but later refuses to compensate the builder for the paving job. The builder has a claim for unjust enrichment in an amount representing the reasonable value of the labor and materials used in paving the driveway.

Suppose, instead, that after completing half the job, the builder tells the owner that he cannot finish the garage as originally agreed, but that he wants to be paid for the work he has done. The owner balks at this demand, arguing that the builder has breached his contractual obligations and is entitled to nothing. A minority of jurisdictions would allow the builder to recover the reasonable value of his services, minus any damages suffered by the owner as a result of the breach. A majority of jurisdictions, however, adhere to the rule that a party who fails to perform contractual obligations has no remedy regardless of the amount of hardship he might endure.

The doctrine of unjust enrichment also governs many situations where the litigants have no contractual relationship. For example, the law finds an implied promise to pay for emergency medical treatment that is neither requested nor consented to by a patient. In some jurisdictions the law finds an implied promise to pay for life-saving medical treatment even when a patient objects to receiving it. The law also requires parents to reimburse a person who voluntarily supplies necessaries such as food, shelter, and clothing to their children. As these examples demonstrate, unjust enrichment is a flexible remedy that allows courts great latitude in shifting the gains and losses between the parties as Equity, fairness, and justice dictate.

Further readings

Calamari, John D., and Joseph M. Perillo. 1999. Contracts. 3d ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West.

Dagan, Hanoch. 1997. Unjust Enrichment: A Study of Private Law and Public Values. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Hurd, Heidi M. 2003. "Nonreciprocal Risk Imposition, Unjust Enrichment, and the Foundations of Tort Law: A Critical Celebration of George Fletcher's Theory of Tort Law." Notre Dame Law Review 78 (April).

Restatement of the Law, Restitution and Unjust Enrichment: Tentative Draft. 2001. Philadelphia, Pa.: Executive Office, American Law Institute.

Smith, Stephen A. 2003. "The Structure of Unjust Enrichment Law: Is Restitution a Right or a Remedy." Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 36 (winter).

Cross-references

Quasi Contract.

unjust enrichment

n. a benefit by chance, mistake, or another's misfortune for which the one enriched has not paid or worked and morally and ethically should not keep. If the money or property received rightly should have been delivered or belonged to another, then the party enriched must make restitution to the rightful owner. Usually a court will order such restitution if a lawsuit is brought by the party who should have the money or property. (See: constructive trust)

unjust enrichment

noun improper benefit, immroper gain, inequitable benefit, inequitable gain, undeeerved gain, unfair betterment, unfair gain, unfair profit, unnustifiable gain, unmerited benefit, wrongful benefit

unjust enrichment

see ENRICHMENT RESTITUTION.
References in periodicals archive ?
The latter is no longer a defendant because it had faced only the now-dismissed unjust enrichment claim.
The court utilized the doctrine of unjust enrichment to address the spouse's interest in the homestead and to prevent her from receiving a windfall.
Because unjust enrichment is an equitable doctrine, the Court determines that judgment should enter for MetLife in the approximate amount Eric Beard had remaining at the time he was notified of the overpayment which, according to bank records, was $217,000."
Counts: breach of contract, unjust enrichment, false advertising, breach of fiduciary duty
The court ruled the companies were liable for trespass and upheld class certification, but it reversed a ruling that found them liable for unjust enrichment.
CGI sued FCi in Fairfax County, Virginia, circuit court, alleging breach of the amended teaming agreement, unjust enrichment and fraudulent inducement.
Q: Can the principles of equity and unjust enrichment justify the entitlement of Vito to reimbursement?
In January of this year, the company filed a lawsuit against TU Rosimushchestvo to recover almost 400 million rubles in its favor "unjust enrichment" and recalculate the rental rate for using the site under the experimental airfield on Tsiolkovsky Street in Voronezh.
Activist Okiya Omtatah had filed a petition on November 28, 2016, objecting to what he termed as 'unjust enrichment by Afrison Import Export and Huelands Limited from numerous fraudulent payments made by the state for multiple acquisitions of LR No.
The 25-year-old rapper retaliated as her manager Klenord Raphael aka Shaft, filed a $10 million lawsuit against her, alleging a breach of contract, unjust enrichment, declaratory judgement and defamation.
CGI worked on the prime contract until November 10, 2014, when FCi terminated CGI for cause because of a staffing dispute.<br />CGI filed suit against FCi, asserting: (1) breach of contract because FCi failed to extend a subcontract with a 41 percent workshare and 10 management positions to CGI; (2) unjust enrichment because CGI allegedly spent $300,000 assisting FCi on the proposal that would result in a $6 million profit for FCi; and (3) fraudulent inducement, seeking lost profits.<br />A jury returned a verdict for CGI in the amount of $11,998,000, but the circuit court set itaside, ruling that the amended teaming agreement was unenforceable and could not give rise to a breach of contract.
Herbert sued Jay-Z for breach of contract and unjust enrichment. He's asking for the percentage he owes as well as interest and damages.