ABSTRACT
Sometimes where a claim is said to be based on unjust enrichment the true basis is apparent from
the nature of the ‘unjust factor’ cited. For example, as argued above, a claim arising from the
vitiation of a transfer of wealth or property is a claim protecting pre-existing ownership; and a claim
based on the unjust factor of ‘failure of consideration’ arising from the termination of a valid
contract is a contractual reliance claim.83 In such cases the reference to unjust enrichment is
redundant. In other cases, ‘unjust enrichment’ may be given as the basis for the claim without any
indication of the actual basis.84 This is the direct consequence of the misapprehension that there is
a principle of unjust enrichment that operates as a justificatory and guiding principle. Such
reasoning fails to satisfy the requirement to give a ground for the decision. It falls foul of the ancient
objection to a claim based on unjust enrichment, that it is based on an unarticulated sense of
injustice.
