unjust enrichment

A legal doctrine that seeks to grant restitution when a person in enriched at another's expense. The principle is applied when there is no contract but a person unjustly or unfairly obtains money or property for which he should expect to pay. The doctrine of unjust enrichment creates a fictitious, or quasi-contract, in order to ensure a just and equitable payment for a benefit received. Unjust enrichment may be considered as a relative of quantum meruit, both of which are implied in law. Unjust enrichment is that which is obtained, and quantum meruit—'as much he deserves'—is a measure of the liability arising from such a contract. They may be called "different labels for the same right to noncontractual relief" and do not arise as separate causes of action (Seiden Associates, Inc. v. ANC Holdings, Inc., 754 F Supp 37, 38 n. 1 (SD NY 1991)). "To find unjust enrichment, a party must receive something of value, to which he was not entitled and which he must restore. There must be some operative act, intent, or situation to make the unjust enrichment unjust and compensatable", Dews v. Halliburton Industries, Inc., 288 Ark 532, 708 S.W.2d 67, 69 (1986). Unjust enrichment is a cause of action that the law implies to remedy a wrong, but should be distinguished from an implied condition which the law implies, or reads into a contract, to give proper effect to the intention of the parties (Seiden Associates, Inc. v. ANC Holdings, Inc., supra at 39).

Terms in bold are defined elsewhere in the Encyclopedia.
Further explanation of the style of reference material is provided in the User Guide (available to subscribers)