Also known as: unjustly enriched · unjust enrichment claim
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A principle requiring restitution to prevent retention of a benefit conferred by another without compensation in circumstances where compensation is reasonably expected. The principle applies when a benefit is obtained not as a gift and not legally justifiable. Courts award restoration of a specific thing or a sum of money to eliminate the enrichment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Umeko Uchida delivered specialized machinery to Urban Logistics under a preliminary agreement that later collapsed. Urban Logistics retained and used the equipment for six months. A court orders return of the machinery itself to eliminate the benefit Urban Logistics obtained without payment.
Uriel Urban paid a full judgment to an injured plaintiff after both he and Uma Upadhyay were found liable for the same accident. Uma Upadhyay received the discharge of her share without contributing. Uriel Urban recovers indemnity from Uma Upadhyay to prevent her retention of that benefit.
Uriah Urban held a house in tenancy by the entirety with his spouse. He executed a will attempting to leave the house to a third party while divorce proceedings were pending. Upon his death the surviving spouse takes title by operation of law. Equity refuses a constructive trust because no unjust enrichment occurred.
Uma Underwood performed extensive network repairs for Upland Industries after the company’s tower failed. No contract formed, yet the company gained reliable service and avoided customer losses. The court awards a sum measured by the reasonable value of the work to prevent the company’s retention of that benefit.
Urban Utley repaired a neighbor’s equipment without any expectation of payment. The neighbor later signed a writing promising substantial compensation. Because the initial work was conferred as a gift, the neighbor was not unjustly enriched and the promise is not binding.
Ulysses Maritime staged a live human-cannonball act at a fair. A television station broadcast the entire performance without consent. The performer recovers the value of the exclusive publicity right because the station obtained that benefit without payment.
The plaintiff must show that the defendant received a benefit, that retention of the benefit would be unjust, and that the circumstances call for restitution rather than a gift or other justification. Courts measure recovery by the value of the benefit received, not necessarily by the plaintiff’s loss.
Supporting sources
…it is unclear whether Ecuadorean tribunal will hear the case, and there is no generally codified Ecuadorean legal remedy for the unjust enrichment and tort claims asserted). [^maj-23]: In Koster , we stated that “[i]n any balancing of conveniences, a real showing of convenience by a plaintiff who has sued in his home forum will…
…App. 1977), which had "awarded interest on suspended royalties" based on "the terms of the royalty agreement . . . rather than unjust enrichment
…from charging an admission fee. "The rationale for [protecting the right of publicity] is the straightforward one of preventing unjust enrichment
…of shareholders. Because of this, descriptions of the duty to disclose are often coupled with statements that the duty prevents unjust enrichment
…owed by a fiduciary to his principal[^maj-6] and also from the law of constructive trusts embodying equitable principles of unjust enrichment
No. Liability arises from the receipt of a benefit whose retention without payment would result in unjust enrichment even when no promise was made. The duty is imposed by law to prevent inequitable gain.
Supporting sources
Restitution takes the form of returning the specific thing when that remedy is available and would prevent unjust enrichment, as when identifiable property remains in the defendant’s possession. Monetary awards are used when specific restoration is impractical.
Supporting sources
When one tortfeasor discharges the common liability, indemnity is available if the other would be unjustly enriched by the discharge. The paying party recovers from the non-paying party to the extent the latter’s share was satisfied without contribution.
Supporting sources
A benefit conferred as a gift or without expectation of compensation does not create unjust enrichment. The recipient has no duty to pay because the transfer was not unjust.
Supporting sources