The Normative Foundations of Unjust Enrichment

Abstract

Abstract There are two principal accounts of the normative foundations of unjust enrichment. The first holds that the plaintiff's right to restitution for unjust enrichment is a claim in corrective justice. The second holds that the plaintiff's right vindicates a set of values to which our legal system is committed. This chapter unpacks what is at issue in the debate between these two accounts, and the chapter sets that debate in two contexts. The first is the main justificatory puzzle posed by the claim in unjust enrichment, which puzzle is brought into relief by asking whether the right to restitution for unjust enrichment is primary or secondary. The second context is a set of linked foundational issues in political philosophy and private law theory, issues that it is argued are engaged by the question: What justifies liability in unjust enrichment?