Unjust Enrichment Involving Multiple Relationships In Japan

Unjust enrichment involving multiple relationships is the most complicated problemin the laws of unjust enrichment and the core of research in that field. After researchfor approximately one hundred years，cases and scholarly theories accumulate a solidtheoretical foundation and yield spectacular fruits academically. With thedevelopment of categorization of unjust enrichment as background， the developmentof categorization of unjust enrichment involvingmultiple relationships becomes themainstreamtheory. Nevertheless， similar to various directions ofdevelopmentoriginated from different perspectives proffered by Japanese scholars in the field ofcategorization recently， there are various views toward the unjust enrichmentinvolving multiple relationships.Unjust enrichment involving multiple relationships refers to the situation where athird party is involved in the process of benefit and damage that typically generatedfrom a traditional unjust enrichment.Japan manages to accumulate a lot of resources regarding unjust enrichment involvingmultiple relationships due to the continuous emergence of relevant cases in real life.The shared focusof these cases is put on the discussion of causation and legalcause—byestablishing the existence of causation or legal cause so as to justify the obligation of return. Unjust enrichment involving multiple relationships centered ontwo types on its early stage， respectively right of action for transferred property andsituation of paying off debt with money from a third party by deceiving. As time goeson， there gradually appear new types， mainly present as disputes developed fromsituations where a bank operating as a medium of payment， interferes the change ofvalue in property and intrudes relevant rights and benefits.The most difficult problem of unjust enrichment involvingmultiple relationships liesin how to determine the party who is entitled to the right of requesting return. Whenonly two parties exist in an unjust enrichment dispute，it is fairly clear that who gainsover the other party’s damage. When a third party is involved， however， the factthat between which parties exist the relationship of unjust enrichment and who isentitled to request a return becomes hard to explain academically. Japanese scholarsassert that it depend on two elements: causation and legal cause. Theories about unjustenrichment involving multiple relationships also choose these two elements to startdiscussion.The research of unjust enrichment involving multiple relationships grows vigorouslyin Japanese academic circle. Although scholars still cannot agree on the standardbased on which should this type of unjust enrichment be categorized， thecategorization involving that of causation and legal cause has become the mainstream.Contrast to Japan， China only has one rule of law and one judicial explanationconcerning unjust enrichment， and academic circle also seldom deal with it， whichcauses the split among judges and judicial confusion. Adopt academic fruits of unjustenrichment involving multiple relationships from Japan would benefit ourdevelopment in this field academically and practically.