ABSTRACT
This article sheds light on the contemporary puzzle of mistaken payments. What is the normative basis of the transferor’s right to receive their money back? Under what conditions (if at all) should this right be denied by the transferee? While joining the growing literature which doubts the predominant unjust enrichment rationale, the article also doubts the existing accounts which aim to situate mistaken payments within the Kantian universe. Instead, the article offers an alternative. Specifically, it argues that an exercise of unpacking the nature of mistaken payments through a Kantian lens must engage with the following three focal points: (1) the nature of money and bank accounts; (2) the nature of the wrong committed by the transferee within the transferor-transferee relationship; and (3) the nature of the wrong committed by the transferor within that relationship. The refined Kantian framework does not just elucidate the nature of liability of mistaken payments, but also coherently situates the various doctrines and concepts which are inherent to those payments within its borders.
Sagi Peari, Kant and mistaken payments: a wrong-based perspective, Jurisprudence – An International Journal of Legal and Political Thought. Published online: 14 October 2025.
Leave a Reply