Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment

Restitutionary claims are important. They are even relevant to such scenarios as restitution of improperly collected taxes and mistaken payments. However, what is the organising idea behind these claims? This question is critical for clarifying the existing law and setting the scene for legal reform...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Alternative law journal 2024-11
Main Authors: Peari, Donna, Peari, Sagi
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Alternative law journal
container_volume
creator Peari, Donna
Peari, Sagi
description Restitutionary claims are important. They are even relevant to such scenarios as restitution of improperly collected taxes and mistaken payments. However, what is the organising idea behind these claims? This question is critical for clarifying the existing law and setting the scene for legal reform. For the first time, this article empirically tests the public’s perception of the current predominant rationale behind restitutionary claims – the notion of unjust enrichment. Since the findings question whether the public supports this rationale, the article joins the growing volume of literature which is sceptical of unjust enrichment.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/1037969X241299898
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_1037969X241299898</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1177_1037969X241299898</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c170t-522ebdcb01aad0c107d3459e2d6598d3e5d51de3aa09b2d6bb6aa9dbfcc984a43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNplj8tKxDAYhYMoWMZ5AHd5gWr-JG3zL2XwBgNulJldya02Mm2HJF3M22vV3awOfOdw4CPkFtgdQNPcAxMN1rjnEjiiQnVBCi5QlciUvCTF0pfL4JqsUwqGCaFqlJwXRO36E829p8fZHIKlQ_jsM3XTbPIvDs5rOnV0Hr_mlKkfY7D94Md8Q646fUh-_Z8r8vH0-L55Kbdvz6-bh21poWG5rDj3xlnDQGvHLLDGCVmh566uUDnhK1eB80JrhuYHGlNrjc501qKSWooVgb9fG6eUou_aYwyDjqcWWLvYt2f24hvGZE2Z</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment</title><source>SAGE:Jisc Collections:SAGE Journals Read and Publish 2023-2024:2025 extension (reading list)</source><creator>Peari, Donna ; Peari, Sagi</creator><creatorcontrib>Peari, Donna ; Peari, Sagi</creatorcontrib><description>Restitutionary claims are important. They are even relevant to such scenarios as restitution of improperly collected taxes and mistaken payments. However, what is the organising idea behind these claims? This question is critical for clarifying the existing law and setting the scene for legal reform. For the first time, this article empirically tests the public’s perception of the current predominant rationale behind restitutionary claims – the notion of unjust enrichment. Since the findings question whether the public supports this rationale, the article joins the growing volume of literature which is sceptical of unjust enrichment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1037-969X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2398-9084</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1037969X241299898</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Alternative law journal, 2024-11</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0002-2331-9909</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27900,27901</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Peari, Donna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peari, Sagi</creatorcontrib><title>Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment</title><title>Alternative law journal</title><description>Restitutionary claims are important. They are even relevant to such scenarios as restitution of improperly collected taxes and mistaken payments. However, what is the organising idea behind these claims? This question is critical for clarifying the existing law and setting the scene for legal reform. For the first time, this article empirically tests the public’s perception of the current predominant rationale behind restitutionary claims – the notion of unjust enrichment. Since the findings question whether the public supports this rationale, the article joins the growing volume of literature which is sceptical of unjust enrichment.</description><issn>1037-969X</issn><issn>2398-9084</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNplj8tKxDAYhYMoWMZ5AHd5gWr-JG3zL2XwBgNulJldya02Mm2HJF3M22vV3awOfOdw4CPkFtgdQNPcAxMN1rjnEjiiQnVBCi5QlciUvCTF0pfL4JqsUwqGCaFqlJwXRO36E829p8fZHIKlQ_jsM3XTbPIvDs5rOnV0Hr_mlKkfY7D94Md8Q646fUh-_Z8r8vH0-L55Kbdvz6-bh21poWG5rDj3xlnDQGvHLLDGCVmh566uUDnhK1eB80JrhuYHGlNrjc501qKSWooVgb9fG6eUou_aYwyDjqcWWLvYt2f24hvGZE2Z</recordid><startdate>20241112</startdate><enddate>20241112</enddate><creator>Peari, Donna</creator><creator>Peari, Sagi</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2331-9909</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241112</creationdate><title>Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment</title><author>Peari, Donna ; Peari, Sagi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c170t-522ebdcb01aad0c107d3459e2d6598d3e5d51de3aa09b2d6bb6aa9dbfcc984a43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Peari, Donna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peari, Sagi</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Alternative law journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Peari, Donna</au><au>Peari, Sagi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment</atitle><jtitle>Alternative law journal</jtitle><date>2024-11-12</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>1037-969X</issn><eissn>2398-9084</eissn><abstract>Restitutionary claims are important. They are even relevant to such scenarios as restitution of improperly collected taxes and mistaken payments. However, what is the organising idea behind these claims? This question is critical for clarifying the existing law and setting the scene for legal reform. For the first time, this article empirically tests the public’s perception of the current predominant rationale behind restitutionary claims – the notion of unjust enrichment. Since the findings question whether the public supports this rationale, the article joins the growing volume of literature which is sceptical of unjust enrichment.</abstract><doi>10.1177/1037969X241299898</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2331-9909</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1037-969X
ispartof Alternative law journal, 2024-11
issn 1037-969X
2398-9084
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_1037969X241299898
source SAGE:Jisc Collections:SAGE Journals Read and Publish 2023-2024:2025 extension (reading list)
title Why the public might doubt the idea of unjust enrichment
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-24T10%3A07%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Why%20the%20public%20might%20doubt%20the%20idea%20of%20unjust%20enrichment&rft.jtitle=Alternative%20law%20journal&rft.au=Peari,%20Donna&rft.date=2024-11-12&rft.issn=1037-969X&rft.eissn=2398-9084&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1037969X241299898&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_1177_1037969X241299898%3C/crossref%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c170t-522ebdcb01aad0c107d3459e2d6598d3e5d51de3aa09b2d6bb6aa9dbfcc984a43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true