Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In [case], the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spent the additional bonus yet, and so could not be said to have been ‘disenriched’ as required by Lord Goff, but argued that he had believed the second payment was intended to increase his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred. Munby J in particular emphasised that the defence was not restricted to cases of disenrichment, although it has not been applied outside this context yet.
Answer
Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663
Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In [case], the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spent the additional bonus yet, and so could not be said to have been ‘disenriched’ as required by Lord Goff, but argued that he had believed the second payment was intended to increase his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred. Munby J in particular emphasised that the defence was not restricted to cases of disenrichment, although it has not been applied outside this context yet.
Answer
?
Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In [case], the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spent the additional bonus yet, and so could not be said to have been ‘disenriched’ as required by Lord Goff, but argued that he had believed the second payment was intended to increase his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred. Munby J in particular emphasised that the defence was not restricted to cases of disenrichment, although it has not been applied outside this context yet.
Answer
Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663, the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spen
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.