Abstract
ABSTRACT Unjustified enrichment in Chinese law has been substantially expanded in recent years by the Chinese Civil Code, as well as by other primary and secondary sources, making comparative studies more viable. This article asks a number of questions about the Chinese law through the lens of a common lawyer. One is the use of the heading ‘quasi-contract’ to describe the chapter of the Code in which the unjustified enrichment provisions are contained. Another concerns the distinction between ‘restitution’ and ‘unjustified enrichment’. A third asks whether the Code should have enshrined a rule prohibiting restitution of the use value, while a fourth concerns the issue of indirect enrichments. Yet another question concerns the inclusion of cases of qualified intent, while the last focuses on defences.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
