Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Goal(s) of the Law of Unjust Enrichment in China

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Law of Unjust Enrichment in China: Necessary or Not?

Part of the book series: China-EU Law Series ((CELS,volume 8))

  • 372 Accesses

Abstract

After having established the terminology framework in Chap. 2, this chapter now discusses the goal(s) of the law of unjust enrichment in China. It is divided into two parts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    It should be noted that in this part (Chap. 3) of the book, ‘civil law’ does not mean the continental or Romano-Germanic legal system. Chinese civil law refers to all the laws adjusting property relationships and personal relationships between civil subjects with equal status, namely natural persons, legal persons and unincorporated associations. Chinese Civil Code, art 2.

  2. 2.

    Under Chinese law, unjust enrichment refers to benefits acquired without a legal basis, which results in other people’s loss. In order to determine the legal basis, it is inevitable to look into other areas of law. Cf Wang (2015b), p. 2.

  3. 3.

    The Communist Party of China is the founding and ruling party of the PRC founded in 1921.

  4. 4.

    The Kuomintang was the ruling political party of the Republic of China in Mainland China (1928–1949). During their time in power, the Kuomingtang regime had promulgated many laws, which not only imported and adopted legal institutions and legal theories from western countries but also reserved some characteristics of China’s traditional legal system. On 22 February 1949, the CPC promulgated the Instruction of Abolishing the Six Codes of Kuomingtang and Determining the Judicial Principles of Liberation Area. Wang and Madson (2013), p. 56; Fu and Zhu (2012), p. 4.

  5. 5.

    The Mao era started from the founding of the PRC and lasted to Deng Xiaoping’s grip onto power and the reversal of policy at the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the CPC in 1978.

  6. 6.

    Wang and Madson (2013), p. 56.

  7. 7.

    Wang (1997), p. 10.

  8. 8.

    ‘His party’ here refers to Mao’s communist supporters within CPC when he was in power.

  9. 9.

    Wang and Madson (2013), p. 56.

  10. 10.

    Ibid.

  11. 11.

    Wang (1997), p. 10; Zhu et al. (2007), p. 4.

  12. 12.

    Wang (1997), p. 11; Zhu et al. (2007), p. 4.

  13. 13.

    Wang (1997), p. 11; Li (2004), p. 31, 32.

  14. 14.

    The Cultural Revolution was a political movement launched from 1966 by Mao Zedong and the ruling class of the CPC at that time. After the end, the CPC officially disowned the Cultural Revolution, stipulating that ‘the Cultural Revolution is a civil strife launched by leaders mistakenly and used by anti-revolution groups, which brought great catastrophe to the CPC, the state and Chinese people’. The CPC News, ‘The Decision about Several Historical Problems of the CPC since the Establishment of PRC’ (The 6th Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee, 29 June 1981) <http://cpc.people.com.cn/GB/64162/64168/64563/65374/4441926.html> accessed 24 September 2021.

  15. 15.

    Wang (1997), p. 11.

  16. 16.

    Ibid; Jerome A Cohen, ‘The PRC Legal System at Sixty’ (East Asia Forum, 1 October 2009) <http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/10/01/the-prc-legal-system-at-sixty/> accessed 24 September 2021.

  17. 17.

    Liu (2004), pp. 82–83.

  18. 18.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Xian Fa (中华人民共和国宪法) [Constitution of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 4 December 1982, effective since 4 December 1982, last amended on 11 March 2018).

  19. 19.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Xinfa (中华人民共和国刑法) [Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 1 July 1979, effective since 1 October 1997, last amended on 26 December 2020.

  20. 20.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Jinji Hetong Fa (中华人民共和国经济合同法) [Economic Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPCSC on 13 December 1981, effective since 1 July 1982, expired on 1 October 1999).

  21. 21.

    The 14th CPC National Party Congress in 1992 declared that economic reform of China would be accelerated toward the direction of establishing a ‘socialist market economy’. Wang (2013), p. 1.

  22. 22.

    Fu (2010), p. 43.

  23. 23.

    Deng (1984), p. 158.

  24. 24.

    Chen (2011), p. 45. The State Council is the Central People’s Government of the PRC.

  25. 25.

    Ibid. See also Cai (2007), p. 154.

  26. 26.

    Wang (1997), p. 15.

  27. 27.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Lifa Fa (中华人民共和国立法法) [Legislation law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 15 March 2000, effective since 1 July 2000, last amended on 15 March 2015).

  28. 28.

    PRC Constitution, art 62; Chinese Legislation Law, art 87, 88.

  29. 29.

    Li and Otto (2002), p. 3.

  30. 30.

    PRC Constitution, art 57.

  31. 31.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 7.

  32. 32.

    Chinese Legislation Law, arts 65 and 88.

  33. 33.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 72. PCs of a province, autonomous region, municipality directly under the central government and their respective PCSCs may enact local regulations. In specific cases, PCs and PCSCs in a major city may also enact local regulations.

  34. 34.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 80.

  35. 35.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 82.

  36. 36.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 96.

  37. 37.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 92. Chinese law does not provide definitions regarding ‘general provisions’ and ‘special provisions’. It is generally agreed by academics and practitioners that they are a pair of relative concepts. General provisions apply to common people and general matters nationally before they are abolished. Special provisions are laws and regulations that are of more special attributes compared with general provisions, applying to certain matters, certain areas, or certain people. Editorial Committee of the Law Dictionary of Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Science (2003), p. 1383, 1734.

  38. 38.

    Chinese Legislation Law, art 92.

  39. 39.

    Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui Changwu Weiyuanhui Guanyu Jiaqiang Falv Jieshi Gongzuo de Jueyi (全国人民代表大会常务委员会关于加强法律解释工作的决议) [Resolution of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress Providing an Improved Interpretation of the Law] (promulgated by the NPCSC on 10 June 1981, effective since the same date).

  40. 40.

    Chen (2003), p. 23, 25.

  41. 41.

    Zhang (2014b), p. 105.

  42. 42.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Sifa Jieshi Gongzuo de Guiding (最高人民法院关于司法解释工作的规定) [Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Judicial Interpretation Work] (promulgated by the SPC on 23 March 2007, effective since 1 April 2007), art 5.

  43. 43.

    Ibid, art 27.

  44. 44.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Anli Zhidao Gongzuo de Guiding (最高人民法院关于案例指导工作的规定) [Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Case Guidance Work] (promulgated by the SPC on 26 November 2010, effective since the same date).

  45. 45.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Fabu Diyipi Zhidao Xing Anli de Tongzhi (最高人民法院关于发布第一批指导性案例的通知) [Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the First Set of Guiding Cases] (promulgated by the SPC on 12 December 2011).

  46. 46.

    N 44.

  47. 47.

    Deng (2015), p. 449, 468.

  48. 48.

    Ibid; Jia (2016), p. 2213.

  49. 49.

    One reason contributing to the absence of a comprehensive civil code in China is the pragmatic and piecemeal approach adopted by the CPC in the 1980s to enacting individual civil law statutes first, as noted above. See supra, Sect. 3.2.2 in this chapter. For a detailed discussion of the complex historical reasons, see Zheng (2013), p. 1; Ran and Du (2005), p. 66, 68; Lin (2019), p. 439.

  50. 50.

    成熟一条制定一条. Wang (2011), p. 26.

  51. 51.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfa Tongze (中华人民共和国民法通则) [General Principles of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 12 April 1986, effective since 1 January 1987, last amended on 27 August 2009, expired on 1 January 2021).

  52. 52.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Hetong Fa (中华人民共和国合同法) [Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 15 March 1999, effective since 1 October 1999, expired on 1 January 2021).

  53. 53.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Wuquan Fa (中华人民共和国物权法) [Property Rights Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 16 March 2007, effective since 1 October 2007, expired on 1 January 2021).

  54. 54.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Qinquan Zeren Fa (中华人民共和国侵权责任法) [Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China] (promulgated by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (‘NPCSC’) on 26 December 2009, effective since 1 July 2010, expired on 1 January 2021).

  55. 55.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfa Zongze (中华人民共和国民法总则) [General Provisions of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China] (Promulgated by the National People’s Congress (‘NPC’) on 15 March 2017, effective since 1 October 2017, expired on 1 January 2021).

  56. 56.

    See Lin (2019), p. 453.

  57. 57.

    Liu (2011), p. 2.

  58. 58.

    Chen (2015), pp. 492–493.

  59. 59.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 1260.

  60. 60.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Hunyin Fa (中华人民共和国婚姻法) [Marriage Law of the PRC] (promulgated by the NPC on 10 September 1980, effective since 1 January 1981, last amended on 28 April 2001, effective since the same date, expired on 1 January 2021).

  61. 61.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Jicheng Fa (中华人民共和国继承法) [Law of Inheritance of the PRC] (promulgated by the NPC on 10 April 1985, effective since 1 October 1985, expired on 1 January 2021).

  62. 62.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Shouyang Fa (中华人民共和国收养法) [Adoption Law of the PRC] (promulgated by the NPCSC on 29 Dececmber 1991, effective since 1 April 1992, last amended on 4 November 1998, effective since the same date, expired on 1 January 2021).

  63. 63.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Danbao Fa (中华人民共和国担保法) [Guarantee Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPCSC on 30 June 1995, effective since 1 October 1995, expired on 1 January 2021).

  64. 64.

    For a detailed discussion of the succession and innovations of the Chinese Civil Code, see Nie (2021), p. 105.

  65. 65.

    See the compilation of new and revised judicial interpretations regarding the Chinese Civil Code by the SPC: https://file.chinacourt.org/f.php?id=cc056d3b2c559102&class=enclosure. The new batch of judicial interpretations mainly include the provisions on the retroactivity of the Chinese Civil Code and interpretations on the books concerning property rights, marriage and family and succession, and guarantee system. Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfadian Shijian Xiaoli De Ruogan Guiding (最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民法典》时间效力的若干规定) [Several Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Retroactivity in the Application of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the SPC on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021); Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfadian Wuquan Bian De Jieshi Yi (最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民法典》物权编的解释(一)) [Interpretation I of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Book Real Right of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the SPC on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021); Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfadian Youguan Danbao Zhidu De Jieshi (最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民法典》有关担保制度的解释) [Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Relevant Guarantee System of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the SPC on 31 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021); Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfadian Hunyin Jiating Bian De Jieshi Yi (最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民法典》婚姻家庭编的的解释(一)) [Interpretation I of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Book Marriage and Family of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the SPC on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021); Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfadian Jicheng Bian De Jieshi Yi (最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民法典》继承编的解释(一)) [Interpretation I of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Book Succession of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the SPC on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021).

  66. 66.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Wuquan Fa (中华人民共和国物权法) [Property Rights Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 16 March 2007, effective since 1 October 2007).

  67. 67.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 205.

  68. 68.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 115.

  69. 69.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 114.

  70. 70.

    Liu (2008), p. 21, 22.

  71. 71.

    Ibid.

  72. 72.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 116. Li (2010), p. 7.

  73. 73.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 114(2). A usufructuary right describes the right to possess, use and benefit from immovable property owned by someone else. Chinese Civil Code, art 323. Article 386 of the Chinese Civil Code provides the concept of real rights for security, which stipulates, ‘the holder of real rights for security shall enjoy priority to receive payments from the property for security in case the obligor fails to pay its due debts or the circumstance for the realization of real rights for security as stipulated by the parties concerned occurs, unless it is otherwise prescribed by any law’.

  74. 74.

    Chinese Civil Code, arts 208, 209, 224.

  75. 75.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 209.

  76. 76.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 224.

  77. 77.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 226.

  78. 78.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 228.

  79. 79.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 225.

  80. 80.

    Ibid. The term ‘bona fide third party’ refers to the third party who has paid reasonable consideration for buying the vessel, aircraft or motor vehicles and has completed the registration for transfer the property right without knowing the ownership of the property has been transferred. The transfer of the property between the original two parties is valid upon delivery. However, if the bona fide third party wants to claim the ownership of the property, the property needs to be transferred to the third party. Wang (2015a), p. 86; Cui (2011), p. 89.

  81. 81.

    Chinese Civil Code, arts 229–231.

  82. 82.

    For a detailed discussion of the causality and abstraction of transfer systems, see Häcker (2010).

  83. 83.

    Häcker (2010), p. 201.

  84. 84.

    This is the position in English law in terms of the sales of goods. Infra, Sect. 5.3.3.4 in Chap. 5.

  85. 85.

    Häcker (2010), p. 201.

  86. 86.

    For more discussions of the principle of separation, see Markesinis et al. (2006), p. 27; Häcker (2013), p. 49.

  87. 87.

    The principles of separation and abstraction originated from German law, which are two of the most intriguing peculiarities of German private law. Under the German mode, any transfer of ownership is legally separate from the underlying contract to make such transfer. Wolff (2005), p. 473, 485; Sadowski (2015), pp. 237, 238–240.

  88. 88.

    Dong (2011), p. 54; Jia (2009), p. 42.

  89. 89.

    Supra, Sect. 3.3.3 in this chapter; Chinese Civil Code, art 209 and art 224.

  90. 90.

    Article 215 of the Chinese Civil Code stipulates, ‘A contract concluded by the parties concerned on the creation, change, transfer or elimination of the real right in an immovable shall become effective upon the conclusion of the contract, except it is otherwise prescribed by any law or agreed by the parties; and whether the real right has been registered does not affect the validity of the contract’. Article 597 (1) of the Chinese Civil Code states: “Where a seller fails to acquire the right to dispose, rendering the transfer of ownership of the subject matter impossible, the buyer may rescind the contract, and claim liability of the seller for breach of contract.”

  91. 91.

    N 65. For a detailed introduction of bona fide acquisition in Chinese law, see infra Sect. 4.3.2.3 in Chap. 4. Article 20 of the Interpretation on Book Real Right stipulates, ‘Where the transferee claims acquirement of ownership in accordance with Article 311 of the Civil Code, such a claim shall not be supported under any of the following circumstances: (1) the transfer contract is determined as void; (2) the transfer contract is revoked’.

  92. 92.

    Other legal reasons, based on which property ownership can be validly transferred, include succession, legal decisions and government decisions. Chinese Civil Code, arts 229 and 230.

  93. 93.

    See Wu and Zhu (2006), p. 32; Liu (2013), p. 426; Liang and Chen (2007), p. 83; Mao (2020), p. 107, 118.

  94. 94.

    N 52.

  95. 95.

    N 20.

  96. 96.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Shewai Jinji Hetong Fa (中华人民共和国涉外经济合同法) [Law of the People’s Republic of China on Foreign-Related Economic Contracts] (promulgated by the NPC on 21 March 1985, effective since 1 July 1985, expired on 1 October 1999).

  97. 97.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Jishu Hetong Fa (中华人民共和国技术合同法) [Law of the People’s Republic of China on Technology Contracts] (promulgated by the NPCSC on 23 June 1987, effective since 1 November 1987, expired on 1 October 1999).

  98. 98.

    GPCL, arts 27, 53, 72, 80, 81, 84, 85, 88-89, 93, 106, 107, 111-116, 134 and 145.

  99. 99.

    Luo (1999), p. 8.

  100. 100.

    Zhong and Yu (1999), pp. 1, 22–30; Liang (2001), p. 92.

  101. 101.

    See infra Sect. 3.5.5.2 in this chapter.

  102. 102.

    N 54.

  103. 103.

    GPCL, arts 117–124.

  104. 104.

    Zhang (2011), p. 415.

  105. 105.

    For a detailed discussion, see Zhang (2020), p. 109.

  106. 106.

    Zhang (2011), p. 425.

  107. 107.

    Chinese Civil Code, arts 1165 and 1166.

  108. 108.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 1167 and Chapter II of Book VII Tort Liability of the Chinese Civil Code.

  109. 109.

    Article 1165 of the Chinese Civil Code states, “The person who is at fault for infringement upon another’s civil right or interest, causing damages, shall be subject to the tort liability.” Previously, the Chinese Tort Law imposes tort liabilities on tortfeasors if their acts infringe another’s right or interest while the cause of damages is not a requisite. See Chinese Tort Law, art 6.

  110. 110.

    Zhou (1985), p. 181.

  111. 111.

    Zhangsun (1993), p. 381. Tang Lv Shu Yi is China’s earliest and most integrated existing legal coded. It was compiled by Zhangsun Wuji and others, and promulgated in 653 by Emperor Gaozong of Tang.

  112. 112.

    Huai (1999), p. 82; Zhang (1999), p. 271.

  113. 113.

    Liang (1987), p. 17, 19–20; Yu (2014), pp. 27, 32–33.

  114. 114.

    This peculiarity of the law in ancient China is summarized as ‘Zhu Fa He Ti, Min Xin Bu Fen’ (the integration of various laws with no differentiation between civil and criminal laws)’. Zhang (2014a); Zhang (1998), p. 1; Yu (2014), pp. 30–31; Epstein (1998), pp. 153, 162. In Chinese history, there was no recorded attempt to make a separate code governing civil matters until the end of the Qing Dynasty. Chen (2015) ch 1.

  115. 115.

    Cheng (1924), p. 233.

  116. 116.

    The Qing government appointed the Japanese scholar, Yoshimasa Matsuoka, to help with the drafting of the Qing Civil Code. Zhang (2004a), p. 140.

  117. 117.

    Li (2003), p. 154; Chang (1973), p. 34.

  118. 118.

    Chang (1973), pp. 283–286; Zhang (1998), pp. 252–261.

  119. 119.

    Yang (2002), pp. 121–123.

  120. 120.

    Negotiorum gestio refers to a situation where a person manages the business of another to prevent damage to the interest of another under no statutory or contractual obligation. For a detailed introduction of this concept, see infra, section “Negotiorum Gestio” in this chapter.

  121. 121.

    Yang (2002), p. 121.

  122. 122.

    Article 812 of the German Civil Code stipulates, ‘A person who obtains something without legal basis as a result of the performance of another or by other means at his expense without legal basis is obliged to return it. This duty also exists if the legal grounds later lapse or if the results intended to be achieved by those efforts in accordance with the contents of the legal transaction do not occur’.

  123. 123.

    Yang (2002), p. 121. This provision is similar to Article 813 of the German Civil Code.

  124. 124.

    Ibid 122. This provision is similar to Article 817 of the German Civil Code.

  125. 125.

    Ibid 121–122. This provision is similar to Article 814 of the German Civil Code.

  126. 126.

    Ibid 122. This provision is similar to Article 815 of the German Civil Code.

  127. 127.

    Ibid. These two provisions basically duplicate Article 816 of the German Civil Code.

  128. 128.

    Ibid. This provision is a replicate of Article 816 (1) and (2) of the German Civil Code.

  129. 129.

    Ibid 123. Articles 938 and 941 of the Qing Civil Code are similar to Article 819 of the German Civil Code.

  130. 130.

    Ibid. Qing Civil Code, arts 937, 938–942.

  131. 131.

    Ibid. This provision is a replicate of Article 822 of the German Civil Code.

  132. 132.

    Chen (2012a), p. 89.

  133. 133.

    Chen (2012b), p. 198.

  134. 134.

    Cf. Yu (1991), p. 895.

  135. 135.

    Li (2002), p. 124, 126.

  136. 136.

    Beiyang Government was the first government acknowledged by international society after the Revolution of 1911, which represented that the Republic of China came into being. The Draft of Civil Law of the Republic of China was not promulgated officially due to complex historical reasons. Cf Dong (2000), p. 172; Pound (1955), pp. 277, 280.

  137. 137.

    Zhonghua Minguo Minfa Dian (中华民国民法典) [Civil Law of the Republic of China] has five volumes, including Volume I General Provisions, Volume II Obligations, Volume III Property Rights, Volume IV Family and Volume V Succession. Volume I General Provisions was promulgated on 23 May 1929 and became effective since 10 October 1929. Volume II Obligations was promulgated on 22 November 1929 and came into force on 5 May 1930. Volume III Property Rights was promulgated on 30 November 1929 and came into force on 5 May 1930. Volume IV Family and Volume V Succession were promulgated on 26 December 1930 and came into force on 5 May 1931. Civil Law of the Republic of China is still currently implemented in Taiwan region although each book has been amended for several times.

  138. 138.

    Liang (2002), pp. 75, 80.

  139. 139.

    Liu (2013), p. 204.

  140. 140.

    Ibid 204.

  141. 141.

    Ibid 207–208.

  142. 142.

    Ibid 208.

  143. 143.

    Ibid 209.

  144. 144.

    This explanation is made by Hu Hanmin, one legislator of the Republic Civil Law. Zhang (2004b), pp. 207–208. See also Pound (1955), p. 278.

  145. 145.

    For the moral idea of ‘reaping without sowing’ in the Chinese culture, see Ye et al. (2007), p. 391.

  146. 146.

    Supra, Sect. 3.3.1 in this chapter.

  147. 147.

    Zhang (2006), p. 30.

  148. 148.

    Liu (2013), p. 211.

  149. 149.

    He et al. (2003a), pp. 179–180, 204, 247.

  150. 150.

    Ibid. According to the drafts, the defendant’s restitutionary liability of unjust enrichment was to return the benefits received without a legal basis in kind to the person suffering a loss. The defendant had to bear ‘compensatory’ liability if the obtained property without a legal basis was damaged as a result of the defendant’s fault or gross negligence. The defendant was entitled to claim for compensation if he or she had paid any expenses beneficial or necessary for the obtained property.

  151. 151.

    Ibid 179.

  152. 152.

    Ibid 204.

  153. 153.

    Ibid 247.

  154. 154.

    Ibid 250.

  155. 155.

    Liang (2002), p. 5; Chen (2010), p. 159, 174.

  156. 156.

    Chen (2010), p. 174; Liu (2013), p. 216.

  157. 157.

    Liu (2013), p. 216.

  158. 158.

    Ibid.

  159. 159.

    Liang (2002), pp. 6–7.

  160. 160.

    He et al. (2003b), p. 430, 484; See also Fu (2019), p. 116, 119.

  161. 161.

    He et al. (2003b), p. 430, 484.

  162. 162.

    Ibid 556, 618.

  163. 163.

    Liu (2013), p. 217.

  164. 164.

    Chen (2015), p. 336.

  165. 165.

    Ibid 335.

  166. 166.

    Zhang (2016), p. 106, 111; Chen (2015), pp. 461–462; Chen (1995), pp. 56–66. Civil law regulates the property and personal transactions between equal parties. Economic law can be defined as laws governing private transactions from the viewpoint of the public interest, which is considered as existing between private law and public law, such as the antitrust law, and laws concerning price and distribution controls. During the ‘war’ between the civil law scholars and economic law scholars, the proponents of economic law contended that the legal relationships between enterprises fell into the region of economic law and civil law should only address legal relationships between individuals and claimed exclusivity over a large part of contract law, intellectual property law and other laws of a quasi economic-administrative nature, which narrowed the scope of civil law significantly. The disputes were about the appropriate scope and method of state intervention or governance in economic arenas. Kato (1982), pp. 429, 437–438.

  167. 167.

    Ibid.

  168. 168.

    Wang Hanbin, ‘Guanyu Zhonghua Renmin Gonghe Guo Minfa Tongze (Caoan) De Shuomin-1986 Nian 4 Yue 2 Ri Zai Di Liu Jie Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui Di Si Ci Huiyi Shang’ [An Illustration to the Draft of the GPCL-On the Fourth Session of the Sixth National People’s Congress] (The NPC of China, 2 April 1986) <http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/huiyi/lfzt/swmsgxflsyf/2010-08/18/content_1588304.htm> accessed on 26 October 2020.

  169. 169.

    Zhang (2016), p. 113.

  170. 170.

    Fu (2019), p. 120.

  171. 171.

    Fu (2019), p. 120.

  172. 172.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Guanche Zhixing Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfa Tongze Ruogan Wenti De Yijian (Shixing) (最高人民法院关于贯彻执行《中华人民共和国民法通则》若干问题的意见(试行)) [Opinions of the SPC on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China (For Trial Implementation)] (promulgated by the SPC on 26 January 1988, effective since the same date, expired on 1 January 2021).

  173. 173.

    Scholars express their dissatisfaction of the Chinese law of unjust enrichment at this stage in a number of books and articles. A few examples are provided here. Huo (2006b), p. 87; Tang (2013), p. 128.

  174. 174.

    Where unjust enrichment cannot be returned in kind, it is generally agreed that the defendant should return the value of the enrichment. See infra, section 3.5.4.2 in this chapter.

  175. 175.

    Liu (2013), p. 220.

  176. 176.

    Chen (2017) pp. 59, 65–66; Fu (2019), p. 120.

  177. 177.

    See infra, Sect. 4.2 in Chap. 4.

  178. 178.

    See supra, Sect. 3.4.3 in this chapter.

  179. 179.

    Article 92 of the GPCL states: “If one acquires unjust benefits without a legal basis and results in another person’s loss, the unjust benefits should be returned to the person suffering a loss’.”

  180. 180.

    See infra, Sect. 3.5.5.2 in this chapter.

  181. 181.

    Supra, Sect. 3.4 in this chapter.

  182. 182.

    See supra, Sect. 3.4.5.5 in this chapter.

  183. 183.

    Supra, Sect. 3.4 in this chapter. The defences of unjust enrichment provided in Article 985 can be found in the German Civil Code (Section 814), the Qing Civil Code (Article 931) and the Republican Civil law (Article 180). The distinction of liabilities of bona fide defendants and mala fide defendants in Article 986 and Article 987 exists in the German Civil Code (Section 819), the Qing Civil Code (Article 938) and the Republican Civil Law (Article 182). The third party’s restitutionary liability receiving unjust benefits from the defendant in Article 988 can be found in the German Civil Code (Section 816 (1)), the Qing Civil Code (Article 934) and the Republican Civil Law (Article 183).

  184. 184.

    See infra, Sect. 4.2 in Chap. 4.

  185. 185.

    See also Chen (2017), p. 63.

  186. 186.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 122 and Chapter 29 of Book III Contracts.

  187. 187.

    Burrows (2002), p. 17; Liu (2009), p. 123; Yang (2012), pp. 109–110.

  188. 188.

    Xiao (2004), p. 263; Liu (2009), p. 123; Yang (2012), pp. 109–110.

  189. 189.

    Xiao (2004), p. 263; Liu (2009), p. 123; Yang (2012), pp. 109–110; Zhou (2019), p. 20, 21.

  190. 190.

    Wang (1991), pp. 571–577.

  191. 191.

    A lease contract is an example that someone can rightfully possess another’s property based on a contractual relationship. Chinese Civil Code, art 703.

  192. 192.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 240.

  193. 193.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 323. Regarding the concept of a usufructuary right, see n 73.

  194. 194.

    Regarding the concept of a real right for security, see n 73. There are three kinds of real rights for security, mortgage rights, pledge rights and lien rights. Only the right holder of a pledge right or lien right has the right to possess the secured property. Chinese Civil Code, arts 394, 425 and 447.

  195. 195.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 425. A pledge is established where a debtor or a third party transfers a movable property to the creditor for possession as a guarantee of the creditor’s rights. If the debtor fails to pay the due debt or falls under any circumstance where the pledge shall be exercised as agreed upon by the parties, the creditor shall have the priority of compensation made from such a movable.

  196. 196.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 447. Article 447(1) stipulates, “Where the debtor fails to pay the due debt, the creditor may exercise a lien over the legally possessed movable of the debtor, and has the priority of compensation made with such a movable.”

  197. 197.

    Yang (2011), p. 137; Pan et al. (2006), p. 81; Liu (2013), p. 230; Zou (2000), pp. 55, 60–61.

  198. 198.

    Under Chinese law, an unauthorized possessor may validly sell the property and transfer the property ownership to a third party in certain circumstances. See infra, Sect. 4.3.2.3 in Chap. 4.

  199. 199.

    Peng (2002), p. 539; Xiao (2004), p. 263; Pan et al. (2006), p. 82; Ji (2006), p. 264.

  200. 200.

    Cf Chen (2014), pp. 279–280; Cui (2013), p. 286, 292.

  201. 201.

    Peng (2002), p. 539; Xiao (2004), p. 263; Pan et al. (2006), p. 82.

  202. 202.

    Wang et al. (1988), p. 424; Ji (2006), pp. 265–266.

  203. 203.

    Liu (2009), p. 123.

  204. 204.

    Ibid; Pan et al. (2006), p. 82.

  205. 205.

    Liu (2009), p. 123.

  206. 206.

    Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minshi Susong Fa (中华人民共和国民事诉讼法) [Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the NPC on 6 April 1991, last amended on 17 June 2017, effective since 1 July 2017).

  207. 207.

    Tan (2008), p. 510; Zhou (2010), p. 83.

  208. 208.

    Liu (2013), pp. 438–446; Yang and Dou (2007), p. 54.

  209. 209.

    Bi (2009), pp. 442–443; Zhang (2010), p. 165.

  210. 210.

    Wang (2015b), p. 110.

  211. 211.

    Cui (2020), p. 180, 189.

  212. 212.

    Ibid.

  213. 213.

    Wang (2015b), p. 113.

  214. 214.

    Cui (2020), p. 190.

  215. 215.

    Article 118 of the Chinese Civil Code states: “An obligatory right is a right holder’s right to request that a specific obligor to perform or not perform certain conduct, arising from contracts, torts, negotiorum gestio, unjust enrichment and other provisions of laws”.

  216. 216.

    See supra, Sect. 3.4.5.5 in this chapter.

  217. 217.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Feizhi Bufen Sifa Jieshi Ji Xiangguan Guifanxing Wenjian De Jueding (最高人民法院关于废止部分司法解释及相关规范性文件的决定) [Decision of the Supreme People’s Court on the Repeal of Some Judicial Interpretations and Relevant Regulatory Documents] (promulgated by the SPC on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021).

  218. 218.

    Ling (2002), p. 358.

  219. 219.

    Werthwein (2013), p. 215.

  220. 220.

    Lin (2010), p. 464.

  221. 221.

    Gerhard Dannemann proposed a similar view regarding the position of German law of unjust enrichment. Dannemann (2009), p. 125.

  222. 222.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 580. It stipulates, ‘Where a party fails to perform the non-monetary obligations or its performance of non-monetary obligations fails to satisfy the terms of the contract, the other party may request the party to perform the obligation except under any of the following circumstances: (1) the obligation is unable to be performed in law or in fact; (2) the subject matter of the obligation is unfit for compulsory performance or the performance expenses are excessively high; (3) the obligee does not request performance within a reasonable time’.

  223. 223.

    Infra, section “Restitution Other Than in Kind” in this chapter.

  224. 224.

    See Cui (2020), pp. 191–192; Pan et al. (2006), p. 88; Yang (2011), p. 152.

  225. 225.

    According to Article 311 of the Chinese Civil Code, a bona fide third person may acquire the ownership in certain circumstances even if the disposer has no right to dispose of the property. See infra, Sect. 4.3.2.3 in Chap. 4. One of the conditions for bona fide acquisition is that the transfer must be made at a reasonable price. Therefore, donations or gifts through which the defendant receives nothing in return are not discussed here.

  226. 226.

    Cui (2020), p. 191.

  227. 227.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 461. It stipulates, ‘In cases where a real property or movable property under possession is damaged or lost, and the holder of this real property or movable property requests for compensations, the possessor shall return the insurance money, damages or indemnities obtained from the said destruction or loss to the holder; and in cases where the damage to the right holder has not been sufficiently made up, a malicious possessor shall also be liable for compensation’.

  228. 228.

    See Zhao (2015), p. 1171.

  229. 229.

    The concept of subject devaluation is discussed in detail in the discussion of the English law of unjust enrichment. Infra, Sect. 5.5.2.2 in Chap. 5.

  230. 230.

    Infra, Sects. 3.5.4.3 and 3.5.4.4 in this chapter.

  231. 231.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 986.

  232. 232.

    Jiang and Cheng (2020), pp. 62, 63.

  233. 233.

    Chen (2017), p. 66.

  234. 234.

    Some scholars have discussed the disenrichment limitation of restitutionary liabilities in unjust enrichment, while there is no prevalent view so far regarding how to determine whether the defendant remains enriched when the received benefits are services or use of property. See Cui (2020), pp. 191–192; Jiang and Cheng (2020), p. 63; Chen (2017), p. 66.

  235. 235.

    Cui (2020), pp. 191–192; Jiang and Cheng (2020), p. 63.

  236. 236.

    Cui (2020), p. 193.

  237. 237.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 987.

  238. 238.

    Supra, Sects. 3.5.2 and 3.5.3 in this chapter.

  239. 239.

    Supra, Sect. 1.1 in Chap. 1.

  240. 240.

    In Chinese law, claims are divided into those based on an obligatory right and those based on a proprietary right. This is discussed in a later section in this book. Infra, Sect. 4.3.2.4 in Chap. 4.

  241. 241.

    Supra, Sect. 3.5.2.2 in this chapter.

  242. 242.

    Tao Honglin (ed), ‘Guanyu <Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfa Dian (Caoan) De Shuoming’ [An Explanation Regarding the Chinese Civil Code (Draft)] (NPCSC Official Website, 22 May 2020) <http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202005/50c0b507ad32464aba87c2ea65bea00d.shtml> accessed 3 October 2021. For the structure of the Chinese Civil Code, see supra, Sect. 3.3.2 in this chapter. For more detailed account regarding why Book III Contracts needs also to play the role providing general provisions for the law of obligations, see Wang (2020), pp. 51–52.

  243. 243.

    See Wang (2018), p. 117, 120.

  244. 244.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 464.

  245. 245.

    Wang (2020), p. 52.

  246. 246.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 133.

  247. 247.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 143.

  248. 248.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 144.

  249. 249.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 145. The exception is that if a civil act purely benefits the person or is commensurate with his or her age, intelligence, and mental health, the act is valid. Accordingly, the validity of a contract concluded by a person with limited capacity that is not approved or ratified by the statutory agent and is not purely beneficial or appropriate to his or her age, intelligence of mental health conditions is ‘in suspense’. The contract becomes valid ab initio on ratification of the statutory agent. Otherwise, the contract should be deemed as void ab initio.

  250. 250.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 146.

  251. 251.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 154.

  252. 252.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 153.

  253. 253.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 147.

  254. 254.

    Chinese Civil Code, arts 148 and 149. According to these two provisions, no matter whether a civil juristic act is performed by a party against his or her true will due to fraud by the other party or a third party, the defrauded party is entitled to request a people’s court or an arbitration institution to revoke the act.

  255. 255.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 150. Article 150 states that the coerced party shall have the right to request for revocation of the act no matter whether he or she performed the civil juristic act as a result of coercion by the other party or a third party.

  256. 256.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 151. Article 151 states that where a civil juristic act is evidently unfair when it is formed as a result of one party taking advantage of the other party’s distress, lack of judgment or other situations, the party suffering a loss is entitled to revoke the act.

  257. 257.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 155.

  258. 258.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 122.

  259. 259.

    Chen-Wishart (2017), pp. 244–245.

  260. 260.

    As discussed, it is generally agreed that the Chinese legal system does not adopt the principle of abstraction and thus property ownership does not shift where a contract is void, revoked or confirmed to have no effect. See supra, Sect. 3.3.4 in this chapter.

  261. 261.

    China adopts a special treatment to money that possession and ownership of money cannot be separated in practice. Hence, where a person has transferred money to another, no matter whether the transfer is supported by a valid legal basis, the recipient obtains the ownership once it possesses the money. Therefore, the transferor is not entitled to raise a proprietary claim for return of money. See infra, Sect. 4.3.2.2 in Chap. 4.

  262. 262.

    Fu (2019), pp. 127–128; Wang (2021), pp. 30, 38.

  263. 263.

    Wang (2020), p. 39.

  264. 264.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 986. For a detailed discission, see supra, Sect. 3.5.4.3 in this chapter.

  265. 265.

    According to Article 93 and Article 94 of the Chinese Contract Law, a contract can be terminated by negotiation or as regulated by law. Article 94 stipulates, ‘The parties to a contract may terminate the contract under any of the following circumstances: (1) it is impossible to achieve the purpose of contract due to force majeure; (2) prior to the expiration of the period of performance, the other party expressly states, or indicates through its conduct, that it will not perform its main obligation; (3) the other party has delayed performance of its main obligation after such performance has been demanded, and fails to perform within a reasonable period; (4) the other party delays performance of its obligations, or breaches the contract in some other manner, rendering it impossible to achieve the purpose of the contract; (5) other circumstance as provided by law’.

  266. 266.

    Fu (2019), p. 128.

  267. 267.

    Fu (2019), p. 129.

  268. 268.

    See Chinese Civil Code, Chapter II ‘Damages’ in Book VII Tort Liability.

  269. 269.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 1165.

  270. 270.

    Supra, Sect. 3.5.4.5 in this chapter.

  271. 271.

    Zhang (2011), p. 474.

  272. 272.

    Supra, Sect. 3.3.4 in this chapter.

  273. 273.

    Ibid.

  274. 274.

    Regarding the concept of the usufructuary right, see n 73.

  275. 275.

    See n 195 and n 196. Due to the principle of legal prescription of property rights, there are only these three kinds of property rights in the Chinese property law: ownership, a usufructuary right, and a real right for security. See supra, Sect. 3.3.3 in this chapter.

  276. 276.

    Häcker (2013), pp. 40–41.

  277. 277.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 1165.

  278. 278.

    Werthwein (2013), p. 194.

  279. 279.

    Real right refers to ownership, usufructuary right and real rights for security. Chinese Civil Code, art 114.

  280. 280.

    Supra, Sect. 3.5.3.3 in this chapter.

  281. 281.

    Sui (2011), p. 86, 91.

  282. 282.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 461.

  283. 283.

    This provision is discussed in detail previously. See supra, Sect. 3.5.2.2 in this chapter.

  284. 284.

    See supra, Sect. 3.3.4 in this chapter. The same view can be found in: Liu (2013), p. 426; Sun (2008), p. 42; Wang (2007), p. 269.

  285. 285.

    Supra, section “Contract Law and Other General Provisions about Civil Juristic Acts” in this chapter.

  286. 286.

    Ibid.

  287. 287.

    Zhu (2017), p. 59, 61.

  288. 288.

    Lorenzen (1928), p. 190, 191.

  289. 289.

    Chinese Civil Code, art 118.

  290. 290.

    See supra, Sect. 3.3.5 in this chapter.

  291. 291.

    Zou (2000), p. 58; Li (2020), p. 24, 35.

  292. 292.

    Zheng (2004), p. 72.

  293. 293.

    Zou (2000), p. 58; Mao (2018), p. 170, 174.

  294. 294.

    Pan et al. (2006), pp. 166–167.

  295. 295.

    Zou (2000), p. 58.

  296. 296.

    Article 980 of the Chinese Civil Code states: “Where the management of business by a manager does not fall into the circumstances under the preceding article (i.e., Article 979 of the Chinese Civil Code), but the beneficiary enjoys the benefit of the management, the beneficiary shall be subject to the obligation under paragraph 1, the preceding article, towards the manager to the extent of the benefit it gains.

  297. 297.

    Cf Li et al. (2006), p. 52; Pan et al. (2006), p. 90; Cui (2013), pp. 306–308; Cui (2020), pp. 183–188; Liu (2020), p. 26, 27.

  298. 298.

    Zou (2000), p. 55. The subsidiarity of unjust enrichment has also been proposed and discussed by scholars in other jurisdictions. The subsidiarity denotes ‘a relationship between different types of claims such that one type of claim is disallowed by the presence of another claim’. Dawson (1951), p. 106; Van Maanen (2006), p. 409.

  299. 299.

    Article 186 of the Chinese Civil Code states: “Where the breach of contract by one party infringes upon the other’s personal or property rights, the aggrieved party is entitled to choose to ask the party in breach to bear liability for breach of contract or assume tort liability.”

  300. 300.

    Liu (2020), p. 27.

  301. 301.

    Supra, Sect. 1.3 in Chap. 1.

  302. 302.

    Supra, Sect. 3.5.5.3 in this chapter.

  303. 303.

    Infra, Chap. 4.

  304. 304.

    A large number of articles have been published discussing the changes to the regulation of unjust enrichment by the Chinese Civil Code, including but not limited to Chen (2020), p. 5; Liu (2020); Wang (2020).

  305. 305.

    Supra, Sect. 1.3 in Chap. 1.

  306. 306.

    Up to this book is drafted, there were only three main monographs about the law of unjust enrichment in Mainland China currently available. The three monographs are Bu Dang De Li Fa De Xingcheng Yu Zhankai [The Formation and Development of the Law of Unjustified Enrichment], Bu Dang De Li Zhidu Yanjiu: Yizhong Xitong De Jiegou, Gongneng Lilve [Research on the Institution of Unjust Enrichment: Discussion on a Systematic Framework and Function], Bu Dang De Li De Guoji Sifa Wenti [Problems of Unjust Enrichment in Private International Law], authored by Liu Yanhao, Hong Xuejun and Huo Zhengxin respectively. Liu (2013); Hong (2004); Huo (2006a). Among the three books, Liu Yanhao’s book, Bu Dang De Li Fa De Xingcheng Yu Zhankai [The Formation and Development of the Law of Unjustified Enrichment], does not discuss the goals or functions of the Chinese law of unjust enrichment. It is thus not considered in this section. Although Huo Zhengxin’s book focuses on the problems of the application of the Chinese law of unjust enrichment in private international law, it also contains one short chapter discussing the functions of the law of unjust enrichment in the Chinese legal system. It is for this reason that this book is considered in this section.

  307. 307.

    Examples are: Jiang (2011), pp. 566–572; Xu and Mei (2007), pp. 229–233; Li (2011), pp. 209–210.

  308. 308.

    Wang Zejian was a former judge of the Judicial Yuan of the Republic of China in Taiwan and now is a professor at Taiwan University. Professor Wang Zejian has published a series of books of civil law, one of which is about unjust enrichment. In 2002, Wang’s book, Bu Dang De Li [Unjust Enrichment], was published for the first time. In 2009, the revised edition of the book was published again. In 2015, Wang revised the 2009 edition and published the latest edition of Bu Dang De Li. Wang’s book series in civil law and the book Bu Dang De Li have influenced numerous scholars in Mainland China. Wang (2015b).

  309. 309.

    Examples are: Huo (2006a), p. 23; Hong (2004), p. 63; Cui (2013), p. 833.

  310. 310.

    Professor Hong Xuejun published a number of articles concerning unjust enrichment. Hong (2003), p. 40; Hong and Zhang (2003), p. 42.

  311. 311.

    Apart from the book about unjust enrichment in private international law, Professor Huo Zhengxin has also published several articles regarding unjust enrichment. Huo (2006b); Xiao and Huo (2004), p. 128.

  312. 312.

    Professor Zhao Lianhui’s research area focuses on Chinese civil law and commercial law.

  313. 313.

    Wang (2015b), p. 3.

  314. 314.

    Ibid 3.

  315. 315.

    Ibid.

  316. 316.

    Ibid 3–4.

  317. 317.

    Ibid 4.

  318. 318.

    Hong (2004).

  319. 319.

    Ibid 62. According to the opinion or Professor Hong Xuejun, the internal function means the function that the law of unjust enrichment has as an independent institution of civil law, which is decided by the constituent elements of unjust enrichment. The external function refers to the institutional function of the law of unjust enrichment. In my understanding of Professor Hong Xuejun’s book, what he wants to express is that the internal function refers to the virtual function that the law of unjust enrichment can have when adjusting legal relationships. The external function refers to the function of the law of unjust enrichment as compared with other departments of civil law when the legal system is considered as a whole.

  320. 320.

    Ibid.

  321. 321.

    Ibid 65.

  322. 322.

    Ibid 66.

  323. 323.

    Ibid 40.

  324. 324.

    Although Professor Hong Xuejun does not state this point expressly in his book, the division of justice originates from Aristotle’s ‘theory of law’. In Aristotle’s account, justice is founded on the principle of equality. Distributive justice requires everyone to be treated equally by receiving the proportion of distributed good which corresponds to their holding of whatever characteristic as the criterion of distribution. Commutative justice concerns equality with only two factors to maintain the proportionate ratio between two ‘goods’, such as labour and wage, damage and recovery. Corrective justice maintains and restores pretransactional equality. When one party realizes a gain due to the other’s corresponding loss, an injustice occurs and the law corrects the injustice by depriving the gain and restoring the gain to the party suffering a loss. Smith (2001), pp. 2115, 2117–2119. Professor Hong Xuejun points out that corrective justice is the normative foundation of the law of unjust enrichment but does not explore this conclusion further. As stated previously in Chap. 1, this book does not discuss the law of unjust enrichment from the jurisprudence perspective, so this view is not elucidated in further detail.

  325. 325.

    Hong (2004), p. 67.

  326. 326.

    Ibid 62–67.

  327. 327.

    Huo (2006a), p. 22.

  328. 328.

    Ibid.

  329. 329.

    Ibid 23.

  330. 330.

    Zhao (2009), p. 312.

  331. 331.

    Ibid.

  332. 332.

    Ibid.

  333. 333.

    Wang (2015b), p. 46. For details about the principle of abstraction, see supra, Sect. 3.3.4 in this chapter.

  334. 334.

    Professor Zhang Longwen is a Taiwan scholar whose expertise is in civil law, especially property law in Taiwan. Zhang (1977), p. 4.

  335. 335.

    A similar view discussed in Hong (2003), p. 42.

  336. 336.

    See supra, section “Contract Law and Other General Provisions about Civil Juristic Acts” in this chapter.

  337. 337.

    See supra, section “Property Law” in this chapter.

  338. 338.

    Huo (2003), p. 35; Zhao (2013), p. 53; Li (2008), p. 62.

  339. 339.

    Zhao (2013), p. 58; Xu (2005), p. 84.

  340. 340.

    Ibid.

  341. 341.

    Wendy (1992), p. 449, 468.

  342. 342.

    Supra, Sect. 3.5.4.5 in this chapter.

  343. 343.

    Supra, Sect. 3.6.3.6 in this chapter.

  344. 344.

    See supra, Sects. 3.5.5.2 and 3.5.5.4 in this chapter.

  345. 345.

    Since 2013, the SPC has required all court judgements be published online in a searchable public database. Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Renmin Fayuan Zai Hulianwang Gongbu Caipan Wenshu De Guiding (最高人民法院关于人民法院在互联网公布裁判文书的规定) [Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on the Issuance of Judgments on the Internet by the People’s Courts] (promulgated by the SPC on 21 November 2013, last amended on 29 August 2016 and effective since 1 October 2016). China Judgments Online was set up by the SPC in 2013 for the purpose of the publication of judgments, of which the website address is: https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/.

  346. 346.

    For a detailed introduction of ‘causes of action’ in China, see Cao (2018), p. 120.

  347. 347.

    Cao (2018), p. 120.

  348. 348.

    Minshi Anjian Anyou Guiding (民事案件案由规定) [Regulations on Causes of Action in Civil Cases] (promulgated by the SPC on 29 October 2007, last amended on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021).

  349. 349.

    Zhu (2014), p. 3.

  350. 350.

    N 348.

  351. 351.

    According to Articles 164 and 175 of the Chinese Civil Procedure Law, a party has the right to file an appeal if it is not satisfied with a judgment or ruling delivered by a court of first instance and the judgment and ruling of a people’s court of second instance shall be final. Although Articles 198 and 199 of the Chinese Civil Procedure Law provide a few certain circumstances where a court may open a re-trial with regard to a legally effective judgment or ruling, re-trial unjust enrichment cases are infrequent in judicial practice and thus are not considered in this case study.

  352. 352.

    Chinese Civil Procedure Law, art 175.

  353. 353.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minfadian Shijian Xiaoli De Ruogan Guiding (最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国民法典〉时间效力的若干规定) [Several Provisions of the SPC on the Retroactivity in the Application of the Civil Code of the PRC] (issued by the SPC on 29 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021).

  354. 354.

    For new approaches regarding data-driven research related Chinese court practice see Ahl et al. (2019), p. 1.

  355. 355.

    Supra, Sects. 1.2 and 1.4 in Chap. 1.

  356. 356.

    Supra, Sect. 3.2.3 in this chapter.

  357. 357.

    In this judgment, only the last names of the claimant and defendant are disclosed.

  358. 358.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shiyong Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo Minshi Susong Fa de Jieshi (最高人民法院关于适用《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》的解释) [Interpretations of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the SPC on 30 January 2015, amended on 23 December 2020, effective since 1 January 2021).

  359. 359.

    For details of the three defences to unjust enrichment claims, please see Sect. 3.5.3.6 in this chapter.

  360. 360.

    Res Judicata is the Latin term for ‘a matter judged’. The principle of res judicata refers to that one party should not be allowed to relitigate a matter that has already been litigated. The civil procedure law in China adopts this principle. Civil Procedure Law, Art 124 (5).

  361. 361.

    See supra, Sect. 3.4.5.5 in this chapter.

  362. 362.

    See supra, Sect. 3.5.4.1 in this chapter.

  363. 363.

    Zuigao Renmin Fayuan Guanyu Shenli Minjian Jiedai Anjian Shiyong Falv Ruogan Wenti De Guiding (最高人民法院关于审理民间借贷案件适用法律若干问题的规定) [Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Private Lending Cases] (promulgated by the SPC on 6 August 2015, effective since 9 January 2015, last amended on 23 Devember 2020 and effective since 1 January 2021 (“Provisions concerning Private Lending”). Before being revised in 2020, Article 26(2) of the Provisions concerning Private Lending states: “Where the interest rate agreed upon by the borrower and the lender exceeds the annual interest rate of 36%, the agreed interest on the excessive part shall be null and void. If the borrower requests the lender’s return of the paid interest on the part exceeding the annual interest rate of 36%, the people’s court shall support such a request.”

  364. 364.

    N 363.

  365. 365.

    See Sect. 3.5.4.1 in this chapter.

  366. 366.

    N 353.

  367. 367.

    See Sect. 3.4.5.5 in this chapter.

  368. 368.

    Supra, Sect. 3.6.3 in this chapter.

  369. 369.

    The third party of a civil action refers to the person who has an independent claim of right to the subject matter of the action between others, or who has no independent right of claim, but has a legal interest in the outcome of the action, and thus participates in the action between others. Chinese Civil Procedure Law, art 56.

  370. 370.

    See n 358.

  371. 371.

    As discussed in the previous section, it is still debatable in terms of the nature of claims for return of property transferred under a terminated contract. Instead of being an unjust enrichment, some scholars endorse the view that such claims should be contractual claims. See supra, section “Contract Law and Other General Provisions about Civil Juristic Acts” in this chapter.

  372. 372.

    Supra, Sects. 3.6.3.3 and 3.6.3.5 in this chapter.

  373. 373.

    Supra, Sects. 3.6.3.3 and 3.6.3.5 in this chapter.

  374. 374.

    Solum (1994), p. 125.

  375. 375.

    Ibid 127.

  376. 376.

    Lanni (2006), p. 115. In 1997 the CPC determined ‘to build a socialist country under the rule of law’ as a basic principle of governing the country. This principle was adopted in the 1999 constitutional amendment explicitly. In 2000, President Jiang Zeming stated that the CPC was fully committed to ‘govern the nation according to law’. China’s entry into the World Trade Organization requires China to establish a legal system with a ‘uniform, impartial and reasonable manner’. The establishment of a rule of law country is conducive to advancing the ‘market economy with Chinese characteristics’. The concept of the ‘rule of law’ is notoriously intricate as a matter of legal jurisprudence, which carries different connotations especially when it is discussed by different people, in different languages and from different perspectives. This book does not explore what the ‘rule of law’ means or requires in China, which is not the topic this book explores. However, it is generally acknowledged that consistency and predictability are two fundamental attributes of the rule of law. For a detailed discussion of the rule of law in China, see Orts (2001), p. 43.

  377. 377.

    Supra, section “Goals of the Law of Unjust Enrichment” in this chapter.

  378. 378.

    See ‘Analysis – The Goals of the Law of Unjust Enrichment’ in Case No.3 Li Jin v Liu Bin. Supra, section “Case No.3 Yuan Deying v Sheng Changlin” in this chapter.

  379. 379.

    Interpretations of the Civil Procedure Law, art 247.

  380. 380.

    Ibid.

  381. 381.

    See supra, Sect. 1.2 in Chap. 1.

References

Books and Articles

  • Ahl B, Cai L, Xi C (2019) Data-driven approaches to studying chinese judicial practice: opportunities, challenges, and issues. China Rev 19:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Bi Y (2009) Minshi Zhengju Anli Shiwu Wenti Jiexi (Case analysis on civil evidence. People’s Court Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrows A (2002) The law of restitution, 2nd edn. Butterworths

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai B (2007) Shehui Zhuangxin Yu Fali Huiying: Yi 21 Shiji Chu Zhongguo Wei Beijing [Legal response to social transition: on the background of China in the early 21st century]. Social Science Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao J (2018) Minshi Anyou De Gongneng: Yanbian, Huafen Yu Dingwei’ [The functions of causes of action in civil cases: evolution, distinction and position]. Sci Law (J Northwest Univ Polit Sci Law) 5:120

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang H (1973) Zhongguo Jindai Fazhi Shi [The history of China’s modern legal system]. Commercial Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen J (1995) From administrative authorisation to private law: a comparative perspective of the developing civil law in the PRC. Martinus Nijhoff Publisher

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen C (2003) Zhongguo Sifa Jieshi De Diwei Yu Gongneng [The position and function of judicial interpretations in China]. China Legal Sci 1:23

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen L (2010) The historical development of the civil law tradition in China: a private law perspective. Legal Hist Rev 78:159

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen A (2011) An introduction to the legal system of the People’s Republic of China, 4th edn. LexisNexis

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen L (2012a) 100 years of Chinese property law: looking back and thinking forward. In: Chen L, (Remco) van Rhee CH (eds) Towards a Chinese civil code: comparative and historical perspectives. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen L (2012b) Contextualizing legal transplant: China and Hong Kong. In: Monateri PG (ed) Methods of comparative law. Edward Elgar Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen H (2014) Zhaifa Gelun [Law of obligations]. China Legal Publishing House

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen J (2015) Chinese law: context and transformation, Rev edn. Brill Nijhoff

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen J (2017) ‘Lun Minfa Zongze Bu Dang De Li Yiban Tiaokuan De Shezhi Moshi’ [Setting of general clauses of unjust enrichment of general prinicples of civil code]. J STJU (Philosophy Soc Sci) 5:59

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Z (2020) Bu Dang De Li Fa Tixi Zhi Zai Goucheng – Weirao Minfa Dian Zhankai [The reorganization of the system of the law of unjust enrichment – a discussion surrounding the Chinese Civil Code]. North Legal Sci 5:5

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng FT (1924) Law codification in China. J Comp Legislat Int Law 6:233

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen-Wishart M (2017) In: Dimatteo LA, Chen L (eds) Invalidity of contract in Chinese and English contract law. Cambridge University Press, Chinese contract law: civil and common law perspectives

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cui J (2011) Wuquan Fa [Property law]. China Renmin University Press, p 89

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui J (2013) Zhaifa Zonglun [General provisions of obligations]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui J (2020) ‘Bu Dang De Li De Xihua Ji Qi Jieshi’ [Further clarification and interpretation of the rules of unjust enrichment]. Mod Law Sci 42:180

    Google Scholar 

  • Dannemann G (2009) The German law of unjustified enrichment and restitution: a comparative introduction. Oxford University Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson J (1951) Unjust enrichment: a comparative analysis. Little, Brown & Co

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng X (1984) Deng Xiaoping Wenxuan (1975-1982) [Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping (1975-1982)]. Foreign Language Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng J (2015) The guiding case system in Mainland China. Front Law China 10:449

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong N (2000) Bijiao Falv Wenhua: Fadian Fa Yu Panli Fa [Comparison of legal cultures: code law and case law]. People’s Public Security University of China Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong X (2011) Lun Wuquan Fa Queli De Biandong Xin Moshi [On the new mode of real right transaction established by the chinese property rights law]. Legal Forum 4:54

    Google Scholar 

  • Editorial Committee of the Law Dictionary of Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Science (2003) Law dictionary. Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein E (1998) Codification of civil law in the People’s Republic of China: form and substance in the reception of concepts and elements of western private law. Univ Br Columbia Law Rev 32:153

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu J (2010) Corporate disclosure and corporate governance in China. Kluwer Law

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu G (2019) Zhongguo Minfadian Yu Bu Dang De Li: Huigu Yu Qianzhan [The Chinese civil code and unjustified enrichment: retrospect and prospect]. ECUPL J 1:116

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu H, Zhu G (eds) (2012) Xianfa Quanli He Xianzheng – Dangdai Zhongguo Xianfa Wenti Yanjiu [Constitutional rights and constitutionalism]. Hong Kong University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Häcker B (2010) Causality and abstraction in the common law. In: Bant E, Harding M (eds) Exploring private law. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Häcker B (2013) Consequences of impaired consent transfers. Hart Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • He Q, Li X, Chen Y (eds) (2003a) Xin Zhongguo Minfa Dian Caoan Zonglan: Shangjuan [An overview of the drafts of civil codes in the new PRC: Volume I]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • He Q, Li X, Chen Y (eds) (2003b) Xin Zhongguo Minfa Dian Caoan Zonglan: Xiajuan [An overview of the drafts of civil codes in the new PRC: Volume III]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong X (2003) Lun Bu Dang De Li Zhidu De Gongneng – Yi Zhong Tixi Hua Quxiang De Minfa Xue Sikao [A discussion of the institution of unjust enrichment – a systematic consideration of civil law]. Law Sci (J Northw Univ Polit Law) 6:40

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong X (2004) Bu Dang De Li Zhidu Yanjiu: Yizhong Xitong De Jiegou, Gongneng Lilve [Research on the institution of unjust enrichment: discussion on a systematic framework and function]. China Procuratorate Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong X, Zhang L (2003) Bu Dang De Li Fanhuan Qingqiu Quan Yu Qita Qingqiu Quan De Jinghe Yanjiu [Research on the concurrent relationship between the unjust enrichment claim and other claims]. Mod Law Sci 5:42

    Google Scholar 

  • Huai X (ed) (1999) Da Ming Lv [Statute laws of the Ming Dynasty]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Huo H (2003) Wuquan Xingwei Wuyin Xing Yu Bu Dang De Li Guanxi Chulun [A preliminary discussion of the relationship between the principle of abstraction and unjust enrichment]. Contemp Legal Sci 8:35

    Google Scholar 

  • Huo Z (2006a) Bu Dang De Li De Guoji Sifa Wenti [Problems of Unjust Enrichment in Private International Law]. Wuhan University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Huo Z (2006b) Zhongguo Bu Dang De Li Zhidu De Goujian Yu Wanshan – Yi Bijiao Fa Wei Shijiao [The establishment and improvement of the Chinese law of unjust enrichment – a comparative law perspective]. Seek Truth 2:87

    Google Scholar 

  • Ji X (2006) Wuquan Zhi Minfa Baohu Zhidu Yanjiu [Research on protection of proprietary rights in civil law]. Legal Publishing House, China

    Google Scholar 

  • Jia L (2009) Wuquan Biandong Qufen Yuanze Dui Gongzheng Yewu De Yingxiang [The impact of the principle of separation in real right transactions on notarization]. China Notary 8:42

    Google Scholar 

  • Jia M (2016) Chinese common law? Guiding cases and judicial reform. Harv Law Rev 129:2213

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang P (ed) (2011) Minfa Xue [The civil law theory], 2nd edn. China University of Political Science and Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang L, Cheng Y (2020) Bu Dang De Li Fanhuan Fanwei Yin Shouyiren Zhuguan Zhuangtai Butong Er Youbie [The different scope of return due to the divergence in the subjective status of the favorees]. People’s Judicature 29:62

    Google Scholar 

  • Kato M (1982) Civil and economic law in the People’s Republic of China. Am J Comp Law 30:429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanni A (2006) Law and justice in the courts of classical athens. Cambridge University Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Li X (2002) Ershi Shiji Qianqi Minfa Xin Chaoliu Yu Zhonghua Minguo Minfa [The new trend of the civil law in early 20th century and the Republican Civil Code]. Tribune Polit Sci Law 1:124

    Google Scholar 

  • Li X (2003) Cong <Daqing Lvli> Dao <Minguo Minfa Dian> De Zhuanxing: Jianlun Zhongguo Gudai Guyou Minfa De Kaifang Xing Tixi [Transition from the Great Qing Code to the Civil Code in the Republic of China: an extended discussion on the open system of civil law in ancient China]. People’s Public Security University of China Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Li A (2004) Wenhua Dageming Chengyin De Fazhi Yinsu Tanxi [Legal analysis of the causes of ‘cultural revolution’]. Zhongguo Dangshi Yanjiu [China Party Hist Res] 6:31

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y (2008) Wuquan Yu Zhaiquan De Eryuan Huafen Dui Minfa Neizai Yu Waizai Tixi De Yingxiang [The influence of the division of property law and obligatory law on the internal and external systems of civil law]. Chinese J Law 5:62

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y (2010) Dui Wuquan Fa Diyibian De Fansi [Relections on the first part of the property rights law]. Contemp Law Rev 2:7

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J (ed) (2011) Minfa [Civil law]. China University of Political Science and Law

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y (2020) Lun Woguo Minfadian Zhong Wuyin Guanli De Guifan Kongjian [A discussion on the regulation of Negotiorum Gestio in the Chinese Civil Code]. China Legal Sci 6(24):35

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Otto J-M (2002) Central and local law-making: studying China’s experience. In: Vermeer EB, d’Hooghe I (eds) China’s legal reforms and their political limits. Curzon Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Wu M, Bai Z (2006) Min Fa Zong Lun —Yuanli GuiZe Anli [Theory of civil law—rational, rules and cases]. Tsinghua University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang Z (1987) Zhongguo Fa De Guoqu, Xianzai Yu Weilai: Yige Wenhua De Jiantao [The past, present and future of chinese law: from a cultural perspective]. J Comp Law 17:17

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang H (2001) Hetongfa De Chenggong Yu Buzu [The success and deficiency of contract law]. Peking Univ Law J 1:92

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang H (2002) Zhongguo Dui Waiguo Minfa De Jishou [Reception of foreign civil laws in China]. Chung-Ang J Legal Stud 26:75

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang H, Chen H (2007) Wuquan Fa [The law of obligatory rights], 4th edn. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin X (ed) (2010) Zhaiquan Fa [The law of obligations]. Xiamen University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin S (2019) Looking back and thinking forward: the current round of civil law codification in China. Int Law 52:439

    Google Scholar 

  • Ling B (2002) Contract law in China. Sweet & Maxwell Asia

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu M (2004) Zhongguo Tese Shehui Zhuyi [Socialism with Chinese characteristics]. Tsinghua University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu B (2008) Zhongguo Wuquan Fa De Chengjiu Yu Buzu [The achievements and shortcomings of China’s property rights law]. Legal Forum 5:21

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu X (2009) Zhaiquan Fa Zonglun [General introduction of obligatory law]. China University of Political Science and Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu K (2011) Minfa Zonglun [A general introduction to civil law]. Peking University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y (2013) Bu Dang De Li Fa De Xingcheng Yu Zhankai [The formation and development of the law of unjustified enrichment]. Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu S (2020) Minfa Dian Bu Dang De Li Qingqiuquan De Dingwei Ji Xiangguan Susong Wenti [The position of unjust enrichment claims in the Chinese Civil Code and the relevant litigation problems]. Natl Judges Coll Law J 19:26, 27

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzen EG (1928) Negotiorum Gestio in Roman and modern civil law. Cornell Law Rev 13:190

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo W (1999) The contract law of the People’s Republic of China: with English translation and introduction. W.S. Hein & Co

    Google Scholar 

  • Mao S (2018) Minfa Dian De Guize Gongji Yu Guifan Peizhi: Jiyu Minfa Zongze De Guancha Yu Piping [The rules and structure of the civil code: some observations and criticism of the general provisions of civil law]. Peking Univ Law J 1:170

    Google Scholar 

  • Mao S (2020) Minfadian Bianzuan Shiye Xia Wuquan Biandong De Jieshi Lun [Interpretation theory of the alteration of property rights from the perspective of civil code compilation]. J Nanjing Univ (Philosophy, Human Soc Sci) 2:107

    Google Scholar 

  • Markesinis BS, Unberath H, Johnston A (2006) The German law of contract: a comparative treatise. Hart Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie W (2021) Minfa Dian De Jicheng Yu Chuangxin [The succession and innovations of the chinese civil code]. Inner Mongolia Soc Sci 42:105

    Google Scholar 

  • Orts EW (2001) The rule of law in China. Vanderbilt J Transnatl Law 34:43

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan X et al (eds) (2006) Zhaiquan Fa: Yuanli, Guize, Anli [Law of obligation: theory, rule, case]. Tsinghua University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng W (ed) (2002) Minfa Xue [The civil law theory]. China University of Political Science and Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Pound R (1955) The Chinese civil code in action. Tulane Law Rev 29:277

    Google Scholar 

  • Ran H, Du L (2005) Xin Zhongguo Fazhi Licheng Minfa 56 Nian [The way to rule of law in New China: a review of civil law in the past 56 years]. J Nanjing Univ (Philos Human Soc Sci) 4:66

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadowski K (2015) The abstraction principle and the separation principle in German law. Adam Mickiewicz Univ Law Rev 4:237

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith L (2001) Restitution: the heart of corrective justice. Tex Law Rev 7:2115, 2117–2115, 2119

    Google Scholar 

  • Solum LB (1994) Equity and the rule of law. In: Shapiro I (ed) The rule of law. New York University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sui P (2011) ‘Lun Zhanyou Zhi Benquan’ [On the right of possession]. Stud Law Bus 2:86

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun X (2008) ‘Woguo Wuquan Fa Zhong Wuquan Biandong Guize De Fali Pingshu’ [Legal discussion on the transfer of ownership in Chinese property law]. Chinese J Law 3:42

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan W (2008) Minshi Zhengju Lifa De Lilun Lichang (Theoretical position of the legislation of civil evidence). Renmin University Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang C (2013) Deguo Bu Dang De Li Fa De Gouzao Yu Zhongguo Bu Dang De Li Fa De Wanshan [The structure of the geman law of unjust enrichment and the perfection of the Chinese law of unjust enrichment]. Beihang Law Rev 1:128

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Maanen GE (2006) Subsidiarity of the action for unjustified enrichment – French law and dutch law: different solutions for the same problem. Eur Rev of Priv Law 3:409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang J (ed) (1991) Zhongguo Minfa Xue: Minfa Zhaiquan [China civil law: civil obligations]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang C (1997) Introduction: an emerging legal system. In: Wang C, Zhang X (eds) Introduction to Chinese law. Sweet & Maxwell Asia

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L (2007) Wuquanfa Yanjiu (Shangjuan) [Research on property law]. China Renmin University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L (2011) ‘Qinli Minfa Tongze De Zhiding’ [The personal experience of the formulation of the general principles of civil law]. Chinese People’s Congr J 7:26

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang J (2013) Institutional change and the development of industrial clusters in China. World Scientific Publishing Company

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L (2015a) Wuquan Fa [Property law]. China Renmin University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Z (2015b) Bu Dang De Li [Unjust enrichment], 2nd edn. Peking University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L (2018) Zhun Hetong Yu Zhaifa Zongze De Sheli [Quasi-contracts and the establishment of the general provisions of the law of obligations]. Jurist 1:117

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang D (2020) Minfa Dian Zhong Bu Dang De Li De Lifa Jiedu He Sifa Shiyong [Legislative interpretation and judicial application of the law of unjust enrichment in the chinese civil code]. Chinese Procurat 15:51

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang H (2021) Minfa Dian Zhong Deli Fanhuan Qingqiuquan Jichu De Tixi Yu Shiyong [The system and application of the legal basis of the right to claim for the return of unjust enrichment]. Jurist 3:30

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang C, Madson NH (2013) Inside China’s legal system. Chandos Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Mingrui G, Handong W (1988) Minfa Xinlun (Xia) [A new discussion of civil law]. China University of Political Science and Law

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendy G (1992) Of harms and benefits: torts, restitution, and intellectual property. J Legal Stud 21:449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werthwein S (2013) Acquisition of ownership. In: Yuanshi B (ed) Chinese civil law: a handbook. Hart

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolff L-C (2005) Assignment agreements under English Law: lost between contract and property law? J Bus Law 7:473

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu B, Zhu X (eds) (2006) Hetong Fa: Yuanli, Guize, Anli [Contract law: rationales, provisions and cases]. Tsinghua University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao Y (ed) (2004) Zhaiquan Fa [Obligatory law]. Zhejiang University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao Y, Huo Z (2004) Bu Dang De Li De Falv Shiyong Guize [Rules on the application of the law of unjust enrichment]. J Legal Res 3:128

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu D (2005) Wuquan Xingwei Wuyinxing Lilun Zhi Mudilun Jieshi [The interpretation of purpose of the principle of abstraction of real acts]. China Legal Sci 2:84

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu H, Mei X (eds) (2007) Minfa Xue [The civil law theory]. University of International Business and Economics Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang L (2002) Daqing Minlv Caoan: Minguo Minlv Caoan [Draft civil law of the great qing dynasty: draft civil law of the Republic of China]. Jilin People Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang L (2011) Zhaifa Zonglun [General introduction to obligatory law]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang L (2012) Zhai Yu Hetong Fa [Obligatory law and contract law]. Law Press China

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang J, Dou Y (2007) Lun Xiaoji Yaojian Shishi De Zhengming-Yi Falv Yaojian Fenlei Shuo Wei Jichu [A discussion on how to prove a negative fact – on the basis of the theory of classification of legal elements ]. Natl Judges Coll Law J 7:54

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye L, Fei Z, Wang T (2007) China: five thousand years of history and civilization. City University of Hong Kong Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu GT (1991) The 1911 revolution: past, present, and future. Asian Surv 31:895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu X (2014) State legalism and the public/private divide in Chinese legal development. Theoret Inq Law 15:27

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L (1977) Minfa Zhaiquan Shiwu Yanjiu [Research on obligations of civil law practice]. Hanlin Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J (1998) Qingdai Minfa Zonglun [A general discussion of civil law in the qing dynasty]. China University of Political Science and Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang R (ed) (1999) Da Qing Lvli [The law of Qing Dynasty]. Tianjin Ancient Works Publishing House

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang S (2004a) Daqing Minlv Caoan Zheyi [Discussion of the draft civil law in the qing dynasty]. Chinese J Law 3:140

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang S (2004b) Zhongguo Jindai Minfa Fadianhua Yanjiu 1901 Zhi 1949 [A study on the codification of civil law in modern China: 1901 to 1949]. China University of Political Science and Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang M (2006) Chinese contract law: theory and practice. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J (2010) ‘Bu Dang De Li Zhong “Wu Falv Shang Yuanyin Zhi Zhengming”’ [How to prove the ‘absence of legal basis’ in unjust enrichment]. Tribune Polit Sci Law 28:165

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang M (2011) Tort liabilities and torts law: the new frontier of Chinese Legal Horizon. Richmond J Glob Law Bus 10:415

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J (2014a) The tradition and modern transition of Chinese law (trans: Zhang L et al.). Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X (2014b) China: exploring an alternative of commercial code in the course of civil codification. In: Wang W-Y (ed) Codification in East China: selected papers from the 2nd IACL thematic conference. Springer International Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X (2016) The new round of civil law codification in China. Univ Bologna Law Rev 1:106

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X (2020) Qinquan Zeren Bian: Zai Chengji Zhong Wanshan He Chuangxin [Book on tort liability: improvement and innovations during inheritance]. China Leg Sci 4:109

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhangsun W (1993) TANG LV SHU YI [The Tang Code]. The Commercial Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao L (2009) Zhaifa Zonglun Yaoyi [Summary of the law of obligations]. China Legal Publishing House

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao J (2013) Lun Youyin Xing Lifa Moshi Xia De Bu Dang De Li Zhidu De Gouzao – Guanyu Woguo Bu Dang De Li Zhidu Shiyong Fanwei De Sikao [The construction of the law of unjust enrichment under A causal transfer system: a further discussion on the basis and the scope of China’s unjust enrichment system]. J Northwest Univ (Philos Soc Sci Edition) 5:53

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao W (2015) Lun Bu Dang De Li Yu Fading Jiechu Zhong De Jiazhi Changhuan – Yi Hetongfa Di 58 Tiao He Di 97 Tiao Houduan Wei Zhongxin [A discussion on the return of value in unjust enrichment and legal termination – focusing on the latter part of Articles 58 and 97 of the contract law]. Peking Univ Law J 5:1171

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng H (2013) General part. In: Yanshi B (ed) Chinese civil law. Hart Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng Y (2004) Minfa Zhaibian Zonglun [The general discussion of the law of obligations], 2nd edn. China University of Political Science and Law Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhong J, Yu G (1999) China’s uniform contract law: progress and problems. Pac Basin Law J 17:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou D (2010) ‘Bu Dang De Li Susong De Zhengming Zeren Fenpei’ [The distribution of burden of proof in unjust enrichment cases]. People’s Judicat 6:83

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou M (1985) Zhongguo Xingfa Shi [History of criminal law in China]. Qunzhong Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu G, Lin L, Xu M (eds) (2007) Xinbian Zhongguo Fa [New edition of Chinese law]. City University of Hong Kong Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu J (2017) Lun Minfa Dian Bianzuan Shijiao Xia De Fanhuan Zhidu [Study on the restitution from the perspective of Chinese Civil Code]. Zhejiang Soc Sci 3:59

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu W (2014) Minshang Anjian – Anyou Yaojian [Civil and commercial cases – the elements of causes of action]. Shanghai Academy of Social Science Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou H (2019) ‘Bu Dang De Li De Goucheng Yaojian Ji Zhengming Zeren Fengpei’ [The constitutive elements of unjust enrichment and the distribution of burden of proof]. People’s Judicat 11:20

    Google Scholar 

  • Zou H (2000) ‘Bu Dang De Li Qingqiuquan Yu Qita Qingqiuquan De Jinghe’ [The concurrence of unjust enrichment claims and other claims]. Stud Law Bus 1:55

    Google Scholar 

Websites

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong

    Siyi Lin

Authors
  1. Siyi Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lin, S. (2022). The Goal(s) of the Law of Unjust Enrichment in China. In: The Law of Unjust Enrichment in China: Necessary or Not?. China-EU Law Series, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06178-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06178-3_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-06177-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-06178-3

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation