Barely 10 years old and growing rapidly, the doctrine of unjust enrichment offers splendid rewards to those who understand it and grave dangers to those who do not. This short book explains clearly and concisely the uses and dangers of the doctrine. Davenport, author of the very successful Construction Claims, and Harris draw primarily upon examples in construction law, where unjust enrichment has had its greatest impact, while pointing out that the principles in their book are of general application. They also note that the recency of the doctrine means that there are as yet only a handful of Australian cases so that academic opinion and international caselaw play a vital role; hence, extensive footnotes and a five-page bibliography.
David Ibbetson exposes the historical layers beneath the modern rules and principles of contract, tort, and unjust enrichment. Small-scale changes caused by lawyers exploiting procedural advantages in their clients' interest are described & analyzed.
The irreparable injury rule says that courts will not grant an equitable remedy to prevent harm if it would be adequate to let the harm happen and grant the legal remedy of money damages. After surveying more than 1400 cases, Laycock concludes that this ancient rule is dead--that it almost never affects the results of cases. When a court denies equitable relief, its real reasons are derived from the interests of defendants or the legal system, and not from the adequacy of the plaintiff's legal remedy. Laycock seeks to complete the assimilation of equity, showing that the law-equity distinction survives only as a proxy for other, more functional distinctions. Analyzing the real rules for choosing remedies in terms of these functional distinctions, he clarifies the entire law of remedies, from grand theory down to the practical details of specific cases. He shows that there is no positive law support for the most important applications of the legal-economic theory of efficient breach of contract. Included are extensive notes and a detailed table of cases arranged by jurisdiction.