SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Kerr v. Baranow, 2011 SCC 10 DATE: [removed]DOCKET: 33157, 33358

First Page		Document Content
Date: 2011-02-20 22:59:06 Equity Civil law Unjust enrichment Common law Pettkus v. Becker Constructive trust Contract Quantum meruit Resulting trust Law Contract law Restitution		SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Kerr v. Baranow, 2011 SCC 10 DATE: [removed]DOCKET: 33157, 33358 Add to Reading List Source URL: www.oclf.ca Download Document from Source Website File Size: 71,47 KB Share Document on Facebook

	Assignment Conditions (English Translation) 1. Assignment 1.1. The ASSIGNOR irrevocably assigns all of his claims of monetary value (including, inter alia, his tort, compensation and unjust enrichment claims) for the vio DocID: 1ufgQ - View Document
	Contracts Outline FallTheories of Obligation (and associated remedies) Agreement with Consideration (expectancy) Promissory Estoppel (reliance) Unjust Enrichment (restitution) DocID: 1rAGj - View Document
	Fraud and Equity By Amy Sara Cores, Esq. Rule 4:50-1 provides that upon motion with briefs the court may relieve a party from a final judgment or order on the grounds of fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of a DocID: 1pqZo - View Document
	UNJUST FACTORS OR LEGAL GROUND? ABSENCE OF BASIS AND THE ENGLISH LAW OF UNJUST ENRICHMENT Nathalie Neumayer* Abstract: Traditionally, there are two main approaches to enrichment by transfer, the common law ‘unjust fact DocID: 1lkRr - View Document
	RECENT DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING UNJUST ENRICHMENT DocID: 18P6T - View Document