Also known as: restitution principle · restitution
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A principle requiring a person unjustly enriched at the expense of another to restore the benefit conferred or value received. The principle operates by awarding a sum of money measured by the reasonable value of what was received or the increase in the recipient's property or interests. It supplies relief when a contract is avoided, a mistake occurs, or a benefit is conferred through part performance or reliance.
Piper Patel suffered property damage when a delivery truck struck her fence. The court awarded compensatory damages that included restitution for the cost of repairs and the value of lost use. This restored Piper to her pre-harm position by requiring the defendant to return the economic equivalent of what was taken.
Peter Park and Paula Pierce contracted to exchange land parcels based on a shared assumption about boundary lines that proved false. When determining whether the mistake materially affected the exchange, the court considered the availability of restitution to restore payments already made. This allowed the adversely affected party to recover value transferred before rescission.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Phuong Pham owned a benefited parcel subject to a recorded stormwater easement. When the burdened owner filled the retention basin, the court considered restitution among available remedies to restore the value of flood protection lost. The analysis weighed the nature of the servitude and the costs of enforcement before ordering relief.
Portia Price promised to exercise a future power of appointment in exchange for value received from Philip Powell. Because the contract was unenforceable, the court awarded restitution of the value Philip had transferred. This prevented unjust retention while denying specific enforcement of the promise.
A lawyer learned from a client that another attorney had misappropriated funds and entered a private restitution agreement. The duty to report serious misconduct to disciplinary authorities remained despite the client's request for silence and the existence of the agreement. The restitution arrangement therefore provided no defense to the reporting obligation.
Premier Manufacturing conferred services on Pulse Media under a contract later avoided for mistake. The court measured the restitution award by the reasonable value of the services to Pulse Media or the increase in its property value. This ensured the award protected the restitution interest without exceeding the benefit actually conferred.
A sum awarded to protect a restitution interest may be measured by the reasonable value to the recipient of what was received or by the extent to which the recipient's property increased in value. The choice between measures is made as justice requires on the facts of each case.
No. The duty to report serious misconduct such as misappropriation of client funds continues even when the information comes from a client who requests silence and even when the lawyers have entered a private restitution agreement.
Restitution is among the remedies available to enforce a servitude. A court may award it alone or in combination with damages, injunctions, or liens after considering the nature of the servitude, the parties' conduct, and the costs and benefits of enforcement.
The promisee cannot obtain damages or the specific property, but remains entitled to restitution of the value given in exchange for the promise.
…by the plaintiff’s expenditures or change of position in reliance as well as by the value to him of the promised performance. Restitution is also an ‘enforcing’ remedy, although it is often said to be based upon some kind of a rescission. In determining what justice requires, the court must remember all of its powers, derived…