Source: https://www.trans-lex.org/959000/_/basic-rule/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 22:16:21+00:00

Document:
Document-Id: 959000, Please cite as: "https://www.trans-lex.org/959000"
at the expense of another party (disadvantaged party), the enriched party is bound to render restitution to the disadvantaged party.
(b) Enrichments which are transferable must be restored in natura. Enrichments which are non-transferable must be restored by paying the sum of money equal to the value of the enrichment to be determined according to the contractually agreed price or market price, including full compensation for the use (usufruct) of the subject matter of the enrichment.
1 The Principle provides the basic rule for the restoration of an unjustified enrichment. Such enrichment may arise out of performance by one party, e.g. under an invalid contract (Subsection (a) i)), or the taking or using of an item or value without the consent of the party who is entitled to the taking or using of that item (Subsection (a) ii)). In both cases, the enrichment is unjustified if there is no legal ground which justifies the performance (e.g. a valid contract which obliges the party to perform) or the taking or using (e.g. a legal right to take or use).
2 The enrichment may constitute any kind of benefit by the enriched party. The enrichment of the party against whom the claim is raised must correspond to the disadvantage of the party who claims the restitution of the unjust enrichment. In the scenario envisaged in Subsection (a) i) this will be the parties to the contract. In the scenario envisaged in Subsection (a) ii) the parties need not have a prior legal relationship with each other.
3 Subsection (b) provides for the consequence of an unjust enrichment which meets the requirements established by Subsection (a). These consequences depend on whether the item which constitutes the enrichment is transferable or not. In the first case, the enriched party must re-transfer the item to the disadvantaged party. In the second case, the enriched party must pay to the disadvantaged party the objective value of the item to be calculated according to the criteria listed in Subsection (b).
4 The enriched party is not liable to restore the enrichment if it has a defense or disenrichment.
Please cite as: "Commentary to Trans-Lex Principle , https://www.trans-lex.org/959000"
Iran-US Claims Tribunal, Buckamier v. The Islamic Republic of Iran et al., YCA 1993, at 296 et seq.
Iran-US Claims Tribunal, Isaiah v. Bank Mellat, 2 IRAN-U.S. C.T.R., at 232 et seq.
Iran-US Claims Tribunal, Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Iran, 6 IRAN-U.S. C.T.R., at 149 et seq.
Iran-US Claims Tribunal, Ultrasystems, Inc. v. Iran, 2 IRAN-U.S. C.T.R., at 100 et seq.
Lena Goldfields v. Soviet Government, Award of 2nd Sept 1930, German original text previously unpublished; English translation: 36 Cornell Law Quarterly (1950/1951), at 42 et seq.
George F. Opp, d/b/a Opp Well Drillings & Supplies v. Ethel Matzke et. al., 559 N.W.2d 837.
Lipkin Gorman v. Karpnale Ltd.  A.C. 548.
Brunetti, Maurizio, The Lex Mercatoria in Practice: The Experience of the Iran- United States Claims Tribunal, in: (2002) 18 Arb. Int., 355 et seq.
Dalhuisen, Jan H. - Legal Orders and Their Manifestation: The Operation of the International Commercial and Financial Legal Order and Its Lex Mercatoria, (2006) 24 Berk J Intl L 129.
Dickstein, Michael E., Revitalizing the International Law Governing Concession Agreements, 5/6 Int’l Tax & Bus.Lawy. 1987/88, at 54 et seq.
Englard, Izhak, Restitution of Benefits Conferred without Obligation, in: David/ Schlechtriem (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law, Bd. X, Tübingen 1991, at 5-1 et seq.
Gallo, Paolo, Unjust Enrichment: A Comparative Analysis, 40 Am.J.Comp.L. 1992, at 431 et seq.
Knapp, Viktor, Die ungerechtfertigte Bereicherung in den Rechten der europäischen sozialistischen Länder, in: Festschrift Zweigert, Tübingen 1981, at 465 et seq.
Meier, Sonja, Bereicherungsanspruch, Dreipersonenverhältnis und Wegfall der Bereicherung im englischen Recht, 1 ZEuP 1993, at 365 et seq.
Nussbaum, Arthur, The Arbitration Between the Lena Goldfields, Ltd. and the Soviet Government, 36 Cornell Law Quarterly 1950/51, at 31 et seq.
Schlechtriem, Peter, Restitution und Bereicherungsausgleich in Europa, Band I (2000).
Schulze, Reiner, Gemeineuropäisches Privatrecht und Rechtsgeschichte, in: Müller-Graff (ed.), Gemeinsames Privatrecht in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, Baden-Baden 1993, at 71 et seq.
Strohbach, Heinz, Spezielle Probleme, in: Ak.St.Rwiss. (ed.), Grundzüge einer wissenschaftlichen Konzeption des allgemeinen Teils der rechtlichen Regelung internationaler Wirtschaftsbeziehungen zwischen den Organisationen der Mitgliedsländer des des RGW, Potsdam-Babelsberg 1986, at 55 et seq.
Van Kooten, Hugo Jan, Restituierechtelijke gevolgen van ongeoorloofde overeenkomsen (Restitionary Consequences og Illegal Contracts), at 329 et seq.
van Kooten, Hugo Jan, Restitutierechteljke gevolgen van ongeoorloofde overeenkomsten, 2002, at p. 338 et seq.
Wühler, Norbert, Application of General Principles of Law, in van den Berg (ed.), Planning efficient Arbitration Proceedings - The Law Applicable in International Arbitration, p. 553 et seq.
Zimmermann, Reinhard, Unjust Enrichment: The Modern Civilian Approach, 15 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 1995, at 403 et seq.
Zweigert, Konrad/ Kötz, Hein, Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung auf dem Gebiete des Privatrechts, 3rd ed., Tübingen 1996.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.