The question was asked as to whether an anticipatory change of position could support a defence to a claim for restitution: ‘save perhaps in exceptional circumstances, the defence of change of position is in principle confined to changes which take place after receipt of the money . . It does not however follow that the defence of change of position can never succeed where the alleged change occurs before the receipt of the money.’
Citations:
[1995] 1 All ER 545
Citing:
Followed – Kleinwort Benson Ltd v South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council ChD 1994
A claim for money had and received fell within section 5 Limitation Act, should be treated with caution. Hobhouse J said: ‘The cause of action in money had and received arises when the relevant money is paid by the plaintiff to the defendant.’
Cited by:
Cited – Commerzbank Ag v Price-Jones CA 21-Nov-2003
The respondent had received a bonus of andpound;250,000. His employers wrote to him in error increasing it. He later chose to stay rather than take redundancy because he now expected the full amount. He resisted an order for restitution. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Equity
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.188270
