No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
In view of the absence of authority an English judge who is called upon to adjudicate in a dispute of a quasi-contractural nature, which contains a foreign element, has, it is submitted, a free hand as regards choice of law. He has it in his power to select one or other of the following tests: —
(A) The domicil either (i) of the party who is impoverished, or (ii) of the party who has been enriched.
(B) The lex loci actus, i.e., either (i) the law of the place in which the unjustifiable enrichment occurs, or (ii) the law of the place in which the transaction takes place which subsequently results in the enrichment.
(C) The proper law of the quasi-contractual obligation ascertained by means of the presumed intention of the parties and by way of analogy to the case of a contract.
(D) The lex fori, i.e., English law.
2 § 453.
3 Ante, p. 85.
4 Zeitschrift fuer auslaendisches und internationales Privatrecht (1928), vol. ii, p. 122, note 1.
5 Ubi supra.
6 See Cass. civ. 4. 5. 1898; D. 1898. i. 457.
7 Ubi supra.
8 Ubi supra.
9 Ubi supra.
10 Cheshire, , op. cit. pp. 657, 658.Google Scholar
11 Valéry, who favours the application of the lex fori to claims for restitution admits that the quantification of the sum to be restored must be governed by the law of the obligation.
12 See per Dunedin, Lord, Cantiare San Rocco v. Clyde Shipbuilding and Engineering Co. [1914] A. C. at p. 434.Google Scholar
13 See, generally, Dicey, , op. cit. p. 207passimGoogle Scholar; Cheshire, , op. cit. p. 563passim.Google Scholar