The Nature of Responsibility for Gain: Gain, Harm, and Keeping the Lid on Pandora's Box

Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Unjust Enrichment

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages

  Barker, Kit ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Corrective justice; Responsibility; Restitution; Unjust enrichment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84921557740     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199567751.003.0006     Document Type: Chapter

References (70)

1. For corrective justice views, see E Weinrib, 'The Gains and Losses of Corrective Justice,' (1994) 44 Duke Law Journal 277;
2. The Idea of Private Law (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1995) esp at 140-2;
3. 'Restitutionary Damages as Corrective Justice' (2000) 1 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 1;
4. 'The Normative Structure of Unjust Enrichment', in C Rickett and R Grantham (eds), Structure and Justification in Private Law (Oxford: Hart, 2008) 21;
5. K Barker, 'Unjust Enrichment, Containing the Beast' (1995) 15 OJLS 457;
6. L Smith, 'Restitution: The Heart of Corrective Justice' (2001) 79 Texas Law Review 2115.
7. M McInnes, 'Unjust Enrichment: A Reply to Professor Weinrib' (2001) Restitution Law Review 29;
8. H Dagan, Unjust Enrichment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) 31;
9. The Law and Ethics of Restitution ('Ethics') (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004);
10. D Klimchuk, 'Unjust Enrichment and Corrective Justice', in J Neyers, M McInnes, and S Pitel (eds), Understanding Unjust Enrichment (Oxford: Hart, 2004) 111;
11. P Saprai, 'Restitution without Corrective Justice' (2006) 14 Restitution Law Review 41.
12. K Barker, 'Theorising Unjust Enrichment: Being Realist(ic)?' (2006) 26 OJLS 609.
13. P Birks, Unjust Enrichment, 2nd ed (Oxford: Clarendon, 2005).
14. HLA Hart, 'Varieties of Responsibility' [1967] 83 LQR 346.
15. see J Gardner, 'The Mark of Responsibility' (2003) 23 OJLS 157;
16. W Lucy, Philosophy of Private Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007) ch 3 ('Basic Responsibility').
17. J Feinberg, Doing and Deserving (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970) 137.
18. See, most notably, HLA Hart, Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the Philosophy of Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968);
19. J Feinberg, The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984).
20. See recently T Honoré, Responsibility and Fault (Oxford: Hart, 1999);
21. P Cane and J Gardner (eds), Relating to Responsibility (Oxford: Hart, 2001);
22. P Cane, Responsibility in Law and Morality (Oxford: Hart, 2002);
23. S Perry, 'Responsibility for Outcomes, Risk and the Law of Torts', in G Postema (ed), Philosophy and the Law of Torts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001) 72;
24. Lucy, above n 7, esp chs 2-6.
25. P Jaffey, The Nature and Scope of Restitution (Oxford: Hart, 2000) 17.
26. See to similar effect Dagan, above n 1, at 17-18.
27. See eg Weinrib, Barker, and Smith, n 1 above.
28. See, classically, J Kleinig, 'Crime and the Concept of Harm' (1978) 15(1) American Philosophical Quarterly 27;
29. Feinberg, above n 11.
30. S Perry, 'Honoré on Responsibility for Outcomes', in Cane and Gardner (eds), above n 12, at 61;
31. 'Responsibility for Outcomes, Risk and the Law of Torts', in Postema, above n 12, at 72;
32. J Gardner, 'Obligations and Outcomes in the Law of Torts', in Cane and Gardner (eds), above n 12, at 111.
33. See Dagan, Ethics, above n 1, at 18;
34. Wonnell, above n 14;
35. J Gordley, Foundations of Private Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 423-5.
36. K Barker, 'Understanding the Unjust Enrichment Principle in Private Law: A Study of the Concept and its Reasons', in Neyers et al (eds), above n 1, at 79.
37. Honoré, 'Appreciations and Responses', in Cane and Gardner (eds), above n 12, at 223.
38. This is questioned by Perry, 'Responsibility for Outcomes, Risk and the Law of Torts', above n 22, at 88, 115.
39. Honoré, Responsibility and Fault, above n 12, at 77-8.
40. K Barker, 'Responsibility for Gain: Unjust Factors or Absence of Legal Ground? Starting Points in Unjust Enrichment Law', in Rickett and Grantham (eds), above n 1, at 47.
41. M McInnes, 'Gain, Loss and the User Principle' [2006] Restitution Law Review 76, 82-6.
42. E Weinrib, 'Omissions and Responsibility' (1980) 30 Philosophical Quarterly 1;
43. Feinberg, above n 18, ch 4;
44. Honoré, Responsibility and Fault, above n 12, ch 3, esp at 46-7, 52-3.
45. See further L Bently, 'Accounting for Profits Obtained by Infringement of Copyright: Where does it End?' (1991) 1 European Intellectual Property Review 5.
46. S Smith, 'Justifying the Law of Unjust Enrichment' (2001) 79 Texas Law Review 2177, 2182-3.
47. Cane, Responsibility in Law and Morality, above n 12, at 208;
48. Klimchuk, above n 1, at 120-1.
49. Weinrib, 'The Normative Structure of Unjust Enrichment', above n 1, at 37.
50. R Grantham, 'Restitutionary Recovery ex Aequo et Bono' [2002] Singapore Journal of Legal Studies 388, 398-402;
51. Birks, Unjust Enrichment, above n 2, at 5-6.
52. see HLA Hart, 'Legal Responsibility and Excuses', in Punishment and Responsibility, above n 11, at 34-5.
53. Dagan, above n 1, at 40.
54. J Raz, The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).
55. E Weinrib, 'Restoring Restitution' (2005) 91(3) Virginia Law Review 861, esp 869-70.
56. W Hohfeld, 'Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning' (1913) 23 Yale Law Journal 16.
57. Honoré, Responsibility and Fault, above n 12, at 87.
58. See P Birks, 'The Role of Fault in the Law of Unjust Enrichment', in G Jones and W Swadling (eds) The Search for Principle: Essays in Honour of Lord Goff of Chieveley (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999) 234, esp 258-74;
59. G Virgo, 'The Role of Fault in the Law of Restitution', in A Burrows and Lord Roger (eds), Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 83 at 96-100.
60. Birks, above n 84.
61. S Hedley, 'Unjust Enrichment' [1995] CLJ 578;
62. Restitution: Its Division and Ordering (London: Sweet and Maxwell, 2001) ch 9.
63. see M McInnes, 'Gain, Loss and the User Principle' [2006] Restitution Law Review 76;
64. Stevens, above n 14, at 78-9.
65. For an exploration of some of the possible repercussions, see A Burrows, 'Are "Damages on the Wrotham Park Basis" Compensatory, Restitutionary or Neither?' in R Cunnington and D Saidov (eds), Contract Damages: Domestic and International Perspectives (Oxford: Hart, 2008).
66. R Grantham, 'The Equitable Basis of the Law of Restitution', in S Degeling and J Edelman (eds), Equity in Commercial Law (Sydney: Lawbook Co, 2005) 349, esp at 365-71;
67. Klimchuk, above n 1, at 136.
68. Barker, 'Theorising Unjust Enrichment; Being Realist(ic)?' above n 1, at 614.
69. See eg D Friedmann, 'Restitution of Benefits Obtained through the Appropriation of Property or the Commission of a Wrong' (1980) 80 CLR 504.
70. M McInnes, 'Interceptive Subtraction, Unjust Enrichment and Wrongs: A Reply to Professor Birks' [2003] CLJ 697, 706-9.