From: Tariq Baloch <tbaloch@gmail.com>
To: Jason W Neyers <jneyers@uwo.ca>
CC: obligations <obligations@uwo.ca>
Date: 01/02/2023 11:13:08 UTC
Subject: Re: ODG: The Laws of Restitution

I (like some others on this list) have had the pleasure of the reading Rob's book and it is thought provoking, insightful and original. A truly seminal contribution. Anyone who says black letter law is boring should be given a copy.  Tariq

On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 4:11 PM Jason W Neyers <jneyers@uwo.ca> wrote:

Dear Colleagues:

 

Congratulations go out to ODGer Robert Stevens on the publication of his newest book with OUP:  The Laws of Restitution (2023): https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-laws-of-restitution-9780192885029?q=robert%20stevens&lang=en&cc=gb#

A 30% discount is available by using the instructions on the attached order form.

 

If anyone has any comments, small or large, Rob would be grateful to have them at robert.stevens@law.ox.ac.uk (“Except for pointing out typos. Please wait for six months before telling me of them,” he says.)

 

From the description:

 

In The Laws of Restitution, Robert Stevens shows that there is no unified law of restitution or unjust enrichment. Instead, there are seven or eight different kinds of private law claim, depending on how you count them, which have nothing important in common one with another that have been grouped together by commentators. Few of these claims have anything to do with enrichment, and what is restituted differs between them. Like all private law claims, those gathered here concern (in)justice between individuals, but they have no further unity. Many of them are not based upon an agreement or a wrong, but that negative feature has no utility. "Restitution" or "unjust enrichment' should cease to be discussed as unified areas of law.

With close attention to caselaw and legislation, the work identifies and describes the various reasons for "restitution" that any properly constructed system of private law ought to recognise. It explains how the law of restitution relates to, and is bound up with, contract, torts, equity, and property law.

 

A query; Would accepting any of Professor’s Stevens insights change the result, or reasons offered, in Barton v Morris [2023] UKSC 3?

 

Happy Reading,

 

 

esig-law

Jason Neyers
Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
Western University
Law Building Rm 26
e. jneyers@uwo.ca
t. 519.661.2111 (x88435)

 

 
 
You're receiving this message because you're a member of the obligations group from The University of Western Ontario. To take part in this conversation, reply all to this message.
 
View group files   |   Leave group   |   Learn more about Microsoft 365 Groups