Even though unjust enrichment has been recognised by English law for several decades, this branch of the law continues to be a highly contested area. Debate rages on with respect to many facets including the formal structure of the subject, the ambit of unjust factors and its relationship with the law of property. The decision of the Singapore Court of Appeal in Esben Finance Ltd and Others v Wong Hou-Lianq Neil (‘Esben Finance Ltd’) explores many of these difficult areas. In a wide-ranging judgment, Esben Finance Ltd covers an astonishing variety of issues namely limitation period, at claimant’s expense, illegality, unjust factors and the relationship between unjust enrichment and property law. The decision of the High Court was delivered by Bernard Eder IJ. On appeal, the judgment was delivered by Justice of Appeal Andrew Phang, with the court consisting of a coram of distinguished Singapore judges, Sundaresh Menon CJ and Judith Prakash JA, and international judges, Lord Neuberger and Arjan Kumar Sikri IJ, eminent judges who previously sat on the UK Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of India respectively …
€ (Taylor and Francis)
Tang Hang Wu, Limitation Period for Unjust Enrichment Claims, at the Claimant’s Expense, Lack of Consent, Illegality, and Vindication of Property Rights: Esben Finance Ltd and Others v Wong Hou-Lianq Neil, King’s Law Journal, Volume 33, 2022 – Issue 3, pages 345-357. Published online: 31 July 2022.
Leave a Reply