Birks’ Absence Of Basis Applied To A Number Of Cases
This is a sample of our (approximately) 5 page long Birks’ Absence Of Basis Applied To A Number Of Cases notes, which we sell as part of the Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes collection, a Distinction package written at University Of Oxford in 2014 that contains (approximately) 91 pages of notes across 13 different documents.
The original file is a 'Word (Docx)' whilst this sample is a 'PDF' representation of said file. This means that the formatting here may have errors. The original document you'll receive on purchase should have more polished formatting.
Birks’ Absence Of Basis Applied To A Number Of Cases Revision
The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.
BIRKS' ABSENCE OF BASIS APPLIED TO A NUMBER OF CASES
MODELS OF ENRICHMENT
1. Birks identifies three models of enrichment whereby his absence of basis can be understood by:
2. NON-PARTICIPATORY ENRICHMENTS a) where C ignorant of D being enriched. Non-participation means there is no basis at all so rest is prima facie rewarded
3. OBLIGATORY ENRICHMENTS a) enrichments where the C paid due to a belief in a valid obligation that turns out to be false - so payments made under a mistake as to liability, taxes exacted by a public authority ultra vires b) In each of these cases the basis - that the money was due - was absent so prima facie rest c) This is the most common head according to Birks
4. VOLUNTARY ENRICHMENTS a) covers contracts, trusts or gifts where C confers a benefit on the basis of something occurring. Where that thing doesn't occur, no basis so prima facie rest b) So a payment on basis that contract will be made or trust will be constituted where trust fails or contract never comes into being basis is no longer present c) Similarly, rest is prima facie warranted where a gift is invalid d) Birks has a wide definition of gift e) Whether an enrichment is a gift is determined with a view to risk-taking according to Birks: 'The busker wants to be paid but takes the risk of getting nothing' f) This definition of gifts also includes by-benefits: which are incidental benefits to another as a result of actions taken in one's self-interest (such as heat rising from the claimant's flat to the defendant's) g) Burrows - highlights how peculiar it is that Birks includes By-benefits in non-participatory enrichments (which rely on C's ignorance)
****************************End Of Sample*****************************
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Restitution of Unjust Enrichment Notes.