Font Size: a A A

The Burden Of Proof In "No Legal Reasons" Of Unjust Enrichment

Posted on:2015-07-04Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:J N LiFull Text:PDF
GTID:2296330467976858Subject:Civil and Commercial Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
Unjust enrichment is to obtain benefits without legal basis, and make otherssuffer a loss, the damaged party shall have the right to ask for the return of theimproper interests. Elements of unjust enrichment party benefit;2. the otherparty suffers losses;3. the existence of a causal relationship between the benefit andthe losses;4. the benefits have no legal reason. The "no legal reason" is the coreelement and also the theoretical basis of unjust enrichment. The distribution ofburden of proof of "no legal reason" is controversial in theory and practice. Unjustenrichment in the legal system of our country is relatively underdeveloped. Incontrast, in foreign countries, the research and application of the system of unjustenrichment is more developed. In many regions outside China, unjust enrichment isdivided into prestation unjust enrichment and non prestation unjust enrichment, andthe burden of proof of different type of unjust enrichment are different.Prestation unjust enrichment to adjust the lack of objective payment, andpayment behavior is made by claimants, the lack of objective facts for paymentbehavior should be clear, at the same time, for the maintenance of the propertystability considerations, claimants required property, should be established by theproof of the unjust enrichment claim from the bear,"the burden of proving theelements of legal reasons". Due to the "no legal reasons" manifests itself as anegative element, it is too difficult for the plaintiff to prove all reasons are not exist. The solution is to prove that the reason which the defendant claim is not exist. Thepremise is, the defendant shall claim a reasonable “legal reason”, otherwise thedefendant shall bear the corresponding disadvantage.Non prestation unjust enrichment on the protection of the interests of ownership,rights in violation of unjust enrichment, because the amount of behavior of thebeneficiary against the interests of the people, damaged system passively suffer lossof interests, it should prove higher requirements imposed on the beneficiary. In theresult of natural events caused by improper profit, was identified in the other afterthe fact, the beneficiary benefit the lack of "legal reasons" is often obvious.Therefore, to the above-mentioned two types of unjust enrichment, the defendantshould bear the burden of proof of "legal reasons". In the resulting from improper bythe third act benefits, based on the principle of fairness, responsibility of proofshould undertake the elements by impaired people. On the improper generated basedon the law of the profit, the interests of the right to request the return of lines arisingdirectly according to the law, there is no existence of burden of proof of “no legalreasons ".
Keywords/Search Tags:Unjustified enrichment, No legal reasons, Burdenof proof, Burden of Claims
PDF Full Text Request
Related items