Restitution

Publication Type

Book Chapter

Version

publishedVersion

Publication Date

2011

Abstract

The most important case on restitution in 2010 is probably the Court of Appeal decision in George Raymond Zage III v Ho Chi Kwong [2010] 2 SLR 589 (Chan Sek Keong CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA and V K Rajah JA) which discussed the state of knowledge required to establish liability for knowing receipt of misapplied trust property and implicitly rejected the strict liablity restitutionary analysis. In addition, there were a number of decisions on different aspects of the law of restitution. Notable on a preliminary point is Cheng William v DBS Bank Ltd [2010] SGHC 34 at [42] (Lai Siu Chiu J), where the court disallowed an application by the plaintiff at the beginning of the trial to amend the reliefs sought to include a claim for restitution, because such a claim based on unjust enrichment had not been pleaded by the plaintiff. This is a useful reminder that the law of unjust enrichment stands alongside contract and torts as an independent source of obligations to be considered while drafting the pleadings, and it is not a vague principle of justice to be resorted to as a remedy of last recourse.

Discipline

Asian Studies | Commercial Law | Contracts | Dispute Resolution and Arbitration

Research Areas

Dispute Resolution

Publication

Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review of Cases 2010

Volume

11

Editor

Teo, K. S.

First Page

517

Last Page

533

ISSN

0219-6638

Publisher

Singapore Academy of Law

City or Country

Singapore

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS