Journal article
Reasons? For Restitution?
- Abstract:
-
The law of unjust enrichment is a subject of intense doctrinal debate. While it has received increasing theoretical attention, deep disagreement remains about its conceptual and normative roots. Charlie Webb’s Reason and Restitution,1 the product of many years’ work, provides a feature-length theoretical discussion of mistaken payments, generally taken to be a central case of unjust enrichment. We should take it seriously. I found the book’s arguments engaging and thoughtprovoking, even when ...
Expand abstract
- Publication status:
- Published
- Peer review status:
- Peer reviewed
Actions
Authors
Bibliographic Details
- Publisher:
- Wiley Publisher's website
- Journal:
- Modern Law Review Journal website
- Volume:
- 79
- Issue:
- 6
- Pages:
- 1116-1136
- Publication date:
- 2016-11-21
- Acceptance date:
- 2016-08-13
- DOI:
- EISSN:
-
1468-2230
- ISSN:
-
0026-7961 and 1468-2230
- Source identifiers:
-
661161
Item Description
- Keywords:
- Pubs id:
-
pubs:661161
- UUID:
-
uuid:1d781da1-a6da-417b-bc32-8f43d497b0a1
- Local pid:
- pubs:661161
- Deposit date:
- 2016-11-22
Terms of use
- Copyright holder:
- © 2016 Wilmot-Smith. The Modern Law Review © 2016 The Modern Law Review Limited.
- Copyright date:
- 2016
- Notes:
- This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Wilmot-Smith, F. (2016), Reasons? For Restitution?. The Modern Law Review, 79: 1116–1136, which has been published in final form at 10.1111/1468-2230.12234. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.
If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record