ABSTRACT

Unjust enrichment continues to fascinate and frustrate. While it is clear that unjust enrichment is a form of private law liability distinct from that found in property, contract, or tort, it remains stubbornly difficult to articulate its underlying normative basis. In this paper I suggest that some headway can be made on this problem by appealing to a distinction between principles of private right and principles of public right. Relying on Ernest Weinrib’s helpful development of this interesting Kantian idea I argue that the law of unjust enrichment may very well manifest principles reflective of public right’s requirement of systematicity. On this view unjust enrichment provides courts with supplemental decision-making principles that permit the suspension of valid principles of private law while leaving the underlying logic of those principles intact.

摘要

不当得利继续令人着迷和令人沮丧。尽管不当得利显然是一种不同于财产、合同或侵权行为的私法责任形式，但要阐明其潜在的规范基础仍然非常困难。在本文中，我建议通过区分私人权利原则和公共权利原则，可以在这个问题上取得一些进展。依靠欧内斯特·温里布对这一有趣的康德思想的有益发展，我认为不当得利法可能很好地体现反映公共权利系统性要求的原则。