The Civil-Law Nature of The Institution of Unjust Enrichment and Certain Theoretical and Practical Problems of Its Application
Abstract
The article analyses the civil-law nature of the institution of unjust enrichment and the features distinguishing condictional obligations from civil liability and delictual obligations. On the basis of the scholarly views of Russian and Uzbek scholars, it is substantiated that the obligation to return unjustly acquired or saved property is not a measure of liability, but a mechanism for restoring the property position that has a restitutionary character. The criteria for determining the scope of the property benefit to be returned and the issue of recovering income from a person who has been unjustly enriched under Article 1028 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan are examined. The author critically assesses the possibility of also recovering income that should have been derived from the property and concludes that, as a general rule, the subject matter of a condictional claim should consist of income actually derived, while in resolving the issue of the return of income, whether the income was actually derived, the enriched person’s opportunities to use the property, the exercise of due care and reasonableness and the economic justification of the income should be assessed in their interconnection. The formation of the institution of unjust enrichment as an independent type of obligation in civil law is also covered.
Keywords
Downloads
References
- Novak D.V. Neosnovatelnoe obogashchenie v grazhdanskom prave [Unjust Enrichment in Civil Law]: monograph. – Moscow: Statut, 2010. – P. 134. Telyukina M.V. Nekotorye problemy obyazatelstv iz neosnovatelnogo obogashcheniya [Certain Problems of Obligations Arising from Unjust Enrichment]: monograph. – Moscow: INFRA-M, 2012. – P. 45.
- Odinayev A.S. Majburiyatlarni buzganlik uchun fuqarolik-huquqiy javobgarlikni qo‘llashning nazariy va amaliy muammolari [Theoretical and Practical Problems of Applying Civil Liability for Breach of Obligations]: Abstract of the Doctor of Science (DSc) dissertation in Law. – Tashkent, 2025. – P. 15.
- Fuqarolik huquqi. II qism [Civil Law. Part II]: textbook / Team of authors. – Tashkent, 2008. – P. 463. O‘zbekiston Respublikasining Fuqarolik kodeksiga sharh: ilmiy sharhlar. 3-jild [Commentary on the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Scholarly Commentaries. Vol. 3] / Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Uzbekistan. – Tashkent: Baktria press, 2013. – P. 352. Rahmonqulov H. Majburiyat huquqi (umumiy qoidalar) [Law of Obligations (General Provisions)]: for master’s students of the “Private Law” track of the Law specialty at higher education institutions. – Tashkent: TSIL, 2005. – P. 165.
- Telyukina M.V. Kondiktsionnye obyazatelstva (teoriya i praktika neosnovatelnogo obogashcheniya) [Condictional Obligations (Theory and Practice of Unjust Enrichment)]: monograph. – Moscow: INFRA-M, 2021. – P. 116.