A liability in unjust enrichment where the claimant is understood to be the owner

Third, the elements of unjust enrichment liability can be satisfied where someone uses or is in possession of another’s asset without the latter’s consent. Fourth, the availability of unjust enrichment claims for protecting ownership has practical benefits. Sometimes the claim can fill a gap where conversion is unavailable, but where the claimant is still understood to be the owner (as in Lipkin itself).

It may also be practically beneficial for the claimant to have the option to choose between unjust enrichment and conversion if both claims were available. Finally, I suggest that accepting the role of unjust enrichment in protecting ownership may affect how we define ownership in a way that is not limited to the law of tort.<br><br><i>Thesis is embargoed until 31 July 2028</i>.