83,046
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a| | {{a|restitution|}}{{d|Restitution|/ˌrɛstɪˈtjuːʃən/|n|}}<br> | ||
The source of some excitement, fear and loathing in the hands of the New York District Court, who in {{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}} applied the [[discharge-for-value defense]] to a [[restitution]] claim with rather more enthusiasm than seems warranted. The law in England (see {{casenote|Barclays Bank Ltd|WJ Simms}} would lead to a different outcome. | A judicial life-hack to cover the parts of commercial life that the [[common law]] traditions of [[tort]] and [[contract]] somehow contrive to miss. | ||
{{restitution capsule}} | |||
The source of some excitement, fear and loathing in the hands of the New York District Court, who in {{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}} applied the [[discharge-for-value defense]] to a [[restitution]] claim with rather more enthusiasm than seems warranted. The law in England (see {{casenote|Barclays Bank Ltd|WJ Simms}}) would lead to a different outcome. | |||
Known also as “[[money had and received]]” and “[[unjust enrichment]]”, in any case it is not to be confused with [[unjustified enrichment|''unjustified'' enrichment]], which is the [[compensation]] plan for those who make it to the [[C-suite]]. | Known also as “[[money had and received]]” and “[[unjust enrichment]]”, in any case it is not to be confused with [[unjustified enrichment|''unjustified'' enrichment]], which is the [[compensation]] plan for those who make it to the [[C-suite]]. | ||
Line 9: | Line 13: | ||
*[[damages]] | *[[damages]] | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||