Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

publishedVersion

Publication Date

6-2019

Abstract

The year 2018 produced only a handful of cases on the law of unjust enrichment and restitution. However, two are seminal cases and of note to the entire common law world: Ochroid Trading Ltd v Chua Siok Lui1 (“Ochroid”) and Turf Club Auto Emporium Pte Ltd v Yeo Boong Hua2 (“Turf Club”). Ochroid dealt with the hotly debated topic of the illegality defence against a claim in unjust enrichment for the recovery of money paid pursuant to an illegal contract. Rejecting the newly formulated Patel v Mirza3 approach under English law, the Court of Appeal in Ochroid set Singapore law on a different path, leaving a number of questions that need to be addressed in future cases. Turf Club, on the other hand, laid down the principles concerning the availability of Wrotham Park damages for breach of contract under Singapore law. Converging with English law, it rejected therestitutionary account of the award and, diverging from English law, it enunciated a different framework of analysis.

Keywords

restitution, Singapore, law cases

Discipline

Asian Studies | Commercial Law | Law

Research Areas

Private Law

Publication

Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review of Singapore Cases

Volume

19

First Page

705

Last Page

720

ISSN

0219-6638

Publisher

Singapore Academy of Law

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

Download

Share

COinS