Daniel Visser, UNJUSTIFIED ENRICHMENT Cape Town: Juta & Co (www.jutalaw.co.za), 2008. xliii + 795 pp. ISBN 97080702179259 (hb). R863. ISBN 9780702176913 (pb). R798.
| DOI | 10.3366/E1364980909001139 |
| Pages | 165-167 |
| Published date | 01 January 2010 |
| Date | 01 January 2010 |
| Author | Niall Whitty |
This is the first comprehensive monograph on the South African law of unjustified enrichment since 1987 and the first in English. It is a superlative and monumental piece of work by one of the foremost scholars in the world on the subject at the top of his form. The book does three things each with the dual purpose of expounding the existing law and paving the way for its future development. First, it sets South African enrichment law in its historical, comparative and philosophical context. Second, it sets that law in the wider context of the South African law of obligations and demarcates its boundaries. Third, and most importantly, it provides a thorough and systematic statement of the existing South African law of unjustified enrichment and its underlying principles and policies, all in sufficient depth and detail to satisfy the different needs of practitioner, judge, academic lawyer, law-reformer and comparatist. Visser's awesome erudition is worn lightly, and the exposition is invariably lucid, easy to follow and a pleasure to read. The book is very well produced except for some proof-reading errors.
The book describes “the long road to, first, the conceptualization of the principle that unjustified enrichment forms the underlying basis of a range of existing actions, and, secondly, the generalization of this basis as a cause of action in itself” (27). This history of the move from the particular to the general through two millennia reflects Visser's mastery of the historical and comparative sources of enrichment law from classical Roman law to the modern European codifications revealing on the way a first-hand detailed knowledge of the
The book is important for comparative law. For example, in Visser's view, Lord Rodger's landmark opinion in
To continue reading
Request your trial