Of course it's just a tree.  What does it look like ?
RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives
  
 
 

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

 
<== Previous message       Back to index       Next message ==>
Sender:
Andrew Tettenborn
Date:
Wed, 21 Mar 2001 09:36:45
Re:
Answers on a postcard

 

At 14:42 20/03/01 -0500, Lionel wrote:

Here is a question which is based on a real case. It did not go to court but to a form of arbitration. I will provide details later... North American members may be familiar.

A comedian gives a live performance. The comedian is unutterably wealthy and well able to afford spontaneous acts of generosity. Near the end of the show he announces that he has not been very funny and he is going to refund the price of tickets. The modality of refund is, for the vast majority who paid for their tickets by credit card, a refund on the credit card account. The plaintiff bought his ticket at face value from the defendant, who bought it by credit card. The refund goes to the defendant. Can the plaintiff recover from the defendant?

Lionel

Assuming the comedian isn't actually in breach of contract by being unfunny, and that this is a case of pure gift, surely the answer must be No. The reason, I suggest, is that contract (in this case the contract between the original purchaser and the spectator) ousts restitution. The spectator has bought a thing of value (the right to watch the performance), which he was prepared to pay face value for. The contract remains on foot and binding. I can't see any court implying a term in it that any refunds are to be passed on.

To take the case out of this rather fantastic scenario, take a slightly more orthodox possibility. I buy a new car, at the same time entering a prize draw with the garage in which the first prize is a full refund of the price of a car bought within a given period. I sell the car on. Then I win the prize. No court in the kingdom would say that I had to account for the prize to the purchaser. He got what he paid for: there's no reason to give him any more.


Andrew

Andrew Tettenborn MA LLB
Bracton Professor of Law

Tel: 01392-263189 / +44-392-263189 (international)
Fax: 01392-263196 / +44-392-263196 (international)
Personal Fax: 0870-0889339 / +44-870-0889339 (international)

Snailmail:
School of Law,
University of Exeter,
Amory Building,
Rennes Drive,
Exeter EX4 4RJ
England

[ Homepage: http://www.ex.ac.uk/law/ ].


<== Previous message       Back to index       Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "


     
Webspace provided by UCC   »
»
»
»
»
For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.
only search restitution site

 
 Contact the webmaster !