The latest Harvard Law Review has a note ((2009) 122 Harv LR 1030) on Lewis

v Lewis 189 P.3d 1134 (2008), which involved a fairly detailed consideration

of the law of unjust enrichment by the Colorado Supreme Court. Parents of

the husband of a married couple bought the couple a house, making the down

payment and taking title in the parents' names; but the couple paid the

mortgage instalments. When the marriage ended the parents offered to

transfer the property to their son if he reimbursed the down payment and

took over the balance of the mortgage; he declined, and they did not offer

this option to their former daughter-in-law. They sold the house to an

unrelated person. The majority deployed a 'mutual purpose' theory which

seems to be something like failure of basis. The former daughter-in-law

obtained, not only her contributions (which the dissenters would have

allowed) but all the profits on the sale. Although the case is not reasoned

in this way, the note in the Harv LR suggests that this could be justified

on a constructive trust theory.

Lionel

====

This message was delivered through the Restitution Discussion Group,

 an international internet LISTSERV devoted to all aspects of the law

 of unjust enrichment. To subscribe, send "subscribe enrichment" in

 the body of a message to <listserv@lists.mcgill.ca>. To unsubscribe,

 send "signoff enrichment" to the same address. To make a posting to

 all group members, send to <enrichment@lists.mcgill.ca>. The list is

 run by Lionel Smith of McGill University, <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>.