SearchSkip to Search Results
- 5Canadian Law
- 5Unjust Enrichment
- 3Unjust Enrichment--Canada
The article focuses on the advances made by the Supreme Court of Canada in the law of unjust enrichment on the case of Kerr versus Baranow which was clarified by Cromwell J. by returning to the first principles of unjust enrichment. The author states that the failure of the court to recognize the...
In this article, the author discusses the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the unjust enrichment case BMP Global Distribution Inc. v. Bank of Nova Scotia. It states that the Supreme Court have granted the Bank of Nova Scotia the right to restitution following the mistaken payments,...
Introduction: In the past decade, the Supreme Court of Canada has taken an active role in restating the rules of causation that apply in tort actions arising from personal injuries. As will be seen, the relevant decisions fall within two broad categories. In the first group of cases, policy...
This article analyzes the role of causation in Canadian tort law. The author uses the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision of Athey v. Leonati as a model to show how even complex problems of causation can be solved through the application of fundamental principles of tort law: the...
This article analyzes the role of freedom of choice in the Canadian law of unjust enrichment. Courts must balance the plaintiff's interest in recovering a benefit, with which she did not freely part, against the defendant's interest in controlling the allocation of resources in his possession....
Discusses the case 'Attorney General v. Blake,' where the Canadian House of Lords accepted the concept of gain-based relief for breach of contract. Calculation of contractual relief with reference either to what the plaintiff lost or what the defendant gained; Delineation of the relevant cause of...
Introduction: When asked by a teacher of law what must be done to inherit eternal life, Jesus responded with the parable of the Good Samaritan. A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving...
Due to the high value that it placed upon the ownership of land, the common law traditionally was wary of intervening if the plaintiff non-contractually improved the defendant’s land. For the most part, liability was imposed only if the landowner acted unconscionably according to the doctrine of...
Introduction: Historically, the common law's attitude towards one who mistakenly provided non-monetary benefits to another, who neither requested nor acquiesced in their conferment, was tight-fisted and fiercely individualistic. \"One cleans another's shoes; what can the other do but put them...
Making sense of juristic reasons: Unjust enrichment after Garland v. Consumers' Gas
This article considers the effect of the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Garland v. Consumers' Gas. The author suggests that lacobucci J. 's judgment replaces the traditional common law approach, which relies on the presence of unjust factors, with a unique version of the...