Recent developments and current issues in the law of unjust enrichment Laurence Rabinowitz QC

Outline The simple structure of the law of unjust enrichment – a review and reminder. Some recent developments – problem areas and controversies: Third party claims – indirect receipt The problem of measuring the enrichment

The basic structure of claims in unjust enrichment The four core questions that determine whether there is a claim in unjust enrichment: Whether the defendant had been enriched; Whether the enrichment was at the claimant’s expense; Whether the enrichment was unjust; Whether there were any defences available to the defendant; See, for example: Benedetti v Sawiris [2014] AC 938, [10]; Banque Financière de la Cité v Parc (Battersea) Ltd [1999] 1 AC 221, 227 (Lord Steyn)

The basic structure of claims in unjust enrichment Some of the key cases: Woolwich Equitable Building Society v IRC [1993] AC 70; Kleinwort Benson v Birmingham City Council [1997] QB 380 Deutsche Morgan Grenfell v IRC [2007] 1 AC 558

THE INDIRECT PAYEE ISSUE The issue The recent cases: TFL Management Services v Lloyd’s TSB Bank plc [2014] 1 WLR 2006, [57] (Floyd LJ); Relfo Ltd v Varsani (No 2) [2015] 1 BCLC 14, [96] (Arden LJ); Bank of Cyprus UK Ltd v Menelaou [2016] 2 ALL ER 913; Investment Trust Companies v HMRC [2015] EWCA Civ 82, [67] (Patten LJ) – Supreme Court appeal heard on 17–19 May

The enrichment – the problem of measurement The issue The recent cases: Sempra Metals v IRC [2008] 1 AC 561; Benedetti v Sawiris [2014] AC 938; Littlewoods Retail v HMRC [2015] EWCA Civ 515