+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk
+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk
Cornerstone Seminars
FIDIC
Knowledge Hub
+ 44 (0)20 8614 6200
info@corbett.co.uk

Unjust Enrichment and Construction Contracts – A Cinderella Story?

Two decades ago, unjust enrichment was described as “the Cinderella of law, barely 10 years old but growing up rapidly. Until recently unrecognised and overshadowed by the ugly sisters, Contract and Tort, Cinderella’s day has arrived.” In England a claim for unjust enrichment was initially referred to as a claim in ‘quasi contract’. This language has now been abandoned and unjust enrichment has a strong foothold in the landscape of commercial law and its role and limits are becoming more clearly defined. Despite this, it is only infrequently pleaded in construction cases and when argued it is often set out in broad terms where the facts do not support such a claim. However, this is cause of action that should not be overlooked by a contractor or employer – especially if they have claims that fall outside the four corners of their construction contract.

By |October 3rd, 2016|Bonds, Dispute Boards, English Law, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Unjust Enrichment and Construction Contracts – A Cinderella Story?

Aspect v Higgins: The Final Reckoning

How long do you have to challenge an adjudicator’s decision? Controversially, the English Supreme Court has now ruled as follows: If you were the loser and required to pay monies, you will have the full limitation period, typically six years, to bring your claim to recover those monies starting from when you were required to make payment to the winner; whereas If you were the winner, your right to seek an improvement of the result will come to an end at the same time as the limitation period for the original claim.

By |September 14th, 2015|English Law, Knowledge Hub|Comments Off on Aspect v Higgins: The Final Reckoning
Go to Top