header-logo header-logo

24 March 2023
Issue: 8018 / Categories: Legal News , Commercial , Property
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Unjust enrichment & the problem with oral agreements

115857
The Supreme Court decision in Barton v Morris is a landmark case on the interaction between the law of unjust enrichment and the law of contract. 

In this week’s NLJ, Sarah Allan, partner, and Chris Ward, knowledge lawyer, at Pennington Manches Cooper, write that the story behind the case ‘is a paradigm of how things ought not to be done’.

The dispute centred on an oral agreement for one party to act as broker in a commercial property sale. Allan and Ward write: ‘There being no written contract, Judge Pearce had to rely on witness evidence to determine what the parties had agreed some five years prior to the High Court hearing in June 2018.’

The authors look at the case and its implications in detail here.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Maryam Syed KC, Church Court Chambers

NLJ Career Profile: Maryam Syed KC, Church Court Chambers

From childhood dreams of the Bar to some of the country's most challenging cases, Maryam Syed KC explains why she has never stopped standing up for others

DAC Beachcroft—Richard Breavington, Rachel Ford & Daniel Guilfoyle

DAC Beachcroft—Richard Breavington, Rachel Ford & Daniel Guilfoyle

DAC Beachcroft significantly expands Cyber team, hiring three Cyber partners

Browne Jacobson—Professor Clive Kay

Browne Jacobson—Professor Clive Kay

Browne Jacobson appoints senior healthcare leader Professor Clive Kay as strategic adviser

NEWS
As family justice moves further away from the courtroom, collaborative law is emerging as an increasingly important route to resolving separation disputes
A busy period for employment law is producing important lessons for employers, employees and tribunals alike
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll