Pace bought materials from the plaintiff to carry out repairs and improvements to the tenement yet became insolvent without having paid the plaintiff.
Testaferrata Bonnici where a certain Pace was occupying a tenement owned by the defendant. When only two individuals are involved, the nexus is easily ascertained yet issues can crop up when there a third party intermediary enters the scenario. Secondly, there must be a causal link between the activity of the plaintiff and the enrichment procured by the individual from whom compensation is being sought. The mere fact that as a result of the plaintiffs’ intervention, the assets of the beneficiary did not diminish constituted an indirect enrichment which amounts to a negative value. In Grech vs Gauci, the Court provided that there is still enrichment despite the fact that the assets of the beneficiary did not increase. The first basic element is the notion of enrichment. Testaferrata Bonnici, the Court laid down the three fundamental and cumulative elements for this action. In one of the earliest judgments on the matter, Said vs. However, the actio de in rem verso is a subsidiary action and can only be employed when the issue is not governed by contract, law or any other obligation. One of the main strong suits of this action is its flexibility in that it can cater for various situations and seeks to provide a remedy to anyone who has been wronged in whatever shape or form. Micallef, “ li terġa’ trodd l-ekwilibriju bejn il-patrimonju ta’ min ikun stagħna u dak tal-parti li tkun għamlet jew nefqet spejjeż biex dan ikun seħħ.” The aim of this action is described eloquently by the Court in Bartolo vs. Owing to its quasi-contract nature, the obligation does not arise from a contract and therefore, in line with the principle of objective justice forming the basis of this action, one is entitled to compensation regardless of consent and capacity. One should be compensated for the benefit gained by an individual without a just cause to the detriment of the former. The notions of equity and fairness serve as the foundation of this action.
#Actio de in rem verso code
On this basis it has been suggested that a more appropriate name to this institute would be that of its closest counterpart under Roman Law.The action of unjustified enrichment, also known as the actio de in rem verso, dates back to Roman Law and despite the fact that it was formally included in the Maltese Civil Code in 2007 by means of Article 1028A, it has always been accepted by the Maltese Courts. The Romans had a much more general action called the 'Condictio Sine Causa' which operated as a subsidiary action against instances of Unjustified Enrichments not covered by the other special remedies falling under the general heading of 'Condictiones'. The slave to the extent oi the benefit acquired by the dominus.
This action was competent to the third party against the dominus to claim what was owed to him by It was but a limited application of the principle prohibitingĪn Unjustified Enrichment arising from the situation where a dominus, who could not be bound by any obligation entered into by his slave with third parties, acquired whatever the slave earned. Also one may argue that the Actio De In Rem Verso in Roman Law was a very different institute from its modern namesake. It has been said that the name says nothing of the nature of the institute, but only of the result it aims at: that is, the reclaiming of the benefit that has been transferred to someone else. The 'Actio De In Rem Verso' is the name given by French jurists to the general action enforcing the universal and age old principle prohibiting the retention of an Unjustified Enrichment.
The actio de in rem verso in Malta (Master’s dissertation). Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
0 kommentar(er)
