Goff & Jones is the leading work on the law of unjust enrichment. Successive editions have played a major role in establishing the central importance of the subject for private and commercial lawyers and developing its key concepts and principles. The text is comprehensive in coverage and written by highly respected scholars who explain all of the rules governing claims in unjust enrichment and discuss how these have been applied through detailed examination of the case-law. The book is frequently cited in courts throughout the Commonwealth and continues to signpost future developments in the field.
Key Features:
New material in the First Supplement to the Tenth Edition:
The 10th edition published in 2022 has now been updated with the 1st Supplement published in November 2025. The Supplement brings the 10th edition up to date with the latest developments, including decisions of the Supreme Court in Law Debenture Trust Corp Plc v Ukraine (on duress); Barton v Morris (on the relationship between contract and unjust enrichment); Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter (on limitation); Byers v Saudi National Bank (on knowing receipt); Waller-Edwards v One Savings Bank plc (on undue influence); URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd (on contribution and limitation); and decisions of other courts in Bank of New York Mellon (International) Ltd v Cine-UK Ltd (on the relationship between contract and unjust enrichment); British Telecommunications plc v HMRC (No.2) and Fenchurch Advisory Partners LLP v AA Ltd (on enrichment); Croxen v Gas and Electricity Markets Authority, Tecnimont Arabia Ltd v National Westminster Bank PLC and Terna Energy Trading DOO v Revolut Ltd (on the rule that enrichment must be ‘at the claimant’s expense’); Moses v Moses (on mistake); Mate v Mate, H&P Advisory Ltd v Barrick Gold (Holdings) Ltd and Rogers v Wills (on free acceptance); R (K) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (on the recovery of overpaid welfare benefits); Banca Intesa Sanpaolo SpA v Comune di Venezia (on the change of position defence); BAT Industries plc v IRC (on limitation and mistake of law).
