Unjust Enrichment, Proprietary Subrogation and Unsatisfactory Explanations
Palmer, Jessica

View/ Open
Cite this item:
Palmer J, "Unjust Enrichment, Proprietary Subrogation and Unsatisfactory Explanations" (2016) 28 Singapore Academy of Law Journal 955-983.
Permanent link to OUR Archive version:
http://hdl.handle.net/10523/8682
Abstract:
While contractual subrogation is understood as a function of agreement or common intention between the relevant parties to assign rights, justifying non-contractual subrogation has proved more difficult. The dominant view appears to be that subrogation arises as a response to what would otherwise be an unjust enrichment and for which a proprietary remedy is readily available. This article argues that non-contractual subrogation gives rise to a new proprietary right in the claimant which cannot be readily justified on the basis of unjust enrichment nor is it simply the vindication of an existing property right. Instead, consideration of how equity normally recognises property rights shows that the intention or conscience of the defendant owner must be a crucial element of the analysis.
Date:
2016
Publisher:
Singapore Academy of Law
Pages:
955-983
Keywords:
Subrogation; Unjust enrichment; Contract law; Insurance law
Research Type:
Journal Article
Languages:
English
Collections
- Journal Article [781]
- Law Collection [510]