University Library
  • Login
A gateway to Melbourne's research publications
Minerva Access is the University's Institutional Repository. It aims to collect, preserve, and showcase the intellectual output of staff and students of the University of Melbourne for a global audience.
View Item 
  • Minerva Access
  • Melbourne Law School
  • Melbourne Law School - Research Publications
  • View Item
  • Minerva Access
  • Melbourne Law School
  • Melbourne Law School - Research Publications
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Materially identical to mistaken payment

    Thumbnail
    Citations
    Altmetric
    Author
    Cutts, T
    Date
    2020-02-01
    Source Title
    Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence: an international journal of legal thought
    Publisher
    Cambridge University Press (CUP)
    University of Melbourne Author/s
    Cutts, Tatiana
    Affiliation
    Melbourne Law School
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Document Type
    Journal Article
    Citations
    Cutts, T. (2020). Materially identical to mistaken payment. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 33 (1), pp.31-57. https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2019.29.
    Access Status
    Access this item via the Open Access location
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11343/254105
    DOI
    10.1017/cjlj.2019.29
    Open Access URL
    http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/100405/1/Materially_Identical_to_Mistaken_Payment_footnotes_ed_.docx
    Abstract
    <jats:p>Mistaken payment is the ‘core case’ of unjust enrichment, and it has had a powerful effect on the development of this area of private law. For Peter Birks, unjust enrichment was simply ‘the law of all events materially identical to mistaken payment’—to be shaped through a process of abstraction from that core case. But this begs the question: how do we work out what counts as ‘materially identical’ to mistaken payment? The most obvious starting point, and that which Birks chose, is the central characteristic of money: money is valuable. Thus, ‘the law of all events materially identical to mistaken payments’ is ‘the law of all events that unjustly enrich one party at another’s expense’.</jats:p><jats:p>In this article, I argue that this starting point is incorrect. Rather than looking for some factual similarity between mistaken payment and other events, we should identify the role that money plays in justifying restitution. And what justifies restitution in the core case is not the ‘value’ or ‘benefit’ that money confers; rather, it is a defect in the legal transaction that links payor with payee. The payee is not liable because she has been ‘enriched’, but because she is the counterparty to a legal transaction which exhibits traits that there are institutional reasons to disavow. Just like contract and torts, the role of value is secondary: where correcting the injustice in specie is impossible or undesirable, the defendant must pay whichever sum will most nearly achieve that goal.</jats:p>

    Export Reference in RIS Format     

    Endnote

    • Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".

    Refworks

    • Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References


    Collections
    • Minerva Elements Records [53102]
    • Melbourne Law School - Research Publications [999]
    Minerva AccessDepositing Your Work (for University of Melbourne Staff and Students)NewsFAQs

    BrowseCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects
    My AccountLoginRegister
    StatisticsMost Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors