UNJUST ENRICHMENT IN CIVIL LAW: NATIONAL AND FOREIGN EXPERIENCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47390/SPR1342V5SI11Y2025N45Keywords:
unjust enrichment, civil law, condiction obligation, restitution, foreign experience.Abstract
The article provides a comprehensive scholarly analysis of the institution of unjust enrichment in civil law, revealing its theoretical and legal foundations as well as the specific features of its regulation in national legislation and foreign legal systems. Particular attention is paid to the norms of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan governing the concept, conditions of occurrence, and legal consequences of unjust enrichment.
In addition, a comparative legal analysis of the legislation and judicial practice of the Russian Federation, Germany, France, and England is conducted, which makes it possible to identify both common characteristics and distinctive features of the regulation of this legal institution. The research is based on formal-legal, comparative, and systemic methods of legal analysis.
The findings substantiate the necessity of improving national civil legislation by clarifying the legal nature of unjust enrichment and enhancing the mechanisms of its application, taking into account relevant foreign experience. The article is intended for researchers, legal scholars, and legal practitioners specializing in civil law.
References
1. Imomov N. Fuqarolik huquqida majburiyatlar nazariyasi. – Toshkent: TDYU, 2020. – B. 213–215.
2. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. – Toshkent, 2024.
3. Zweigert K., Kötz H. Introduction to Comparative Law. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. – P. 560–565.
4. Алексеев С.С. Общая теория права. – М.: Норма, 2018. – С. 312–315.
5. Zweigert K., Kötz H. Introduction to Comparative Law. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. – P. 555–570.
6. Суханов Е.А. Гражданское право: в 4 т. – М.: Статут, 2019. – Т. 2. – С. 487.
7. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. 1023-modda.
8. Брагинский М.И., Витрyaнский В.В. Договорное право. – М.: Статут, 2018. – С. 401–403
9. Imomov N. Fuqarolik huquqi. – Toshkent: TDYU, 2021. – B. 268–270
10. Суханов Е.А. Гражданское право: в 4 т. – М.: Статут, 2019. – Т. 2. – С. 490–492.
11. Брагинский М.И., Витрyaнский В.В. Договорное право. – М.: Статут, 2018. – С. 405–408.
12. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. 1024–1025-moddalar.
13. Иоффе О.С. Обязательственное право. – М.: Юридическая литература, 2017.–С.376–379.
14. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. 1029-modda.
15. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. 1026-modda.
16. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. 327-modda.
17. Суханов Е.А. Гражданское право. – М.: Статут, 2019. – Т. 2. – С. 495–497.
18. O’zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. 1029-modda.
19. Гражданский кодекс Российской Федераtsии (часть вторая). Ст. 1102–1109.
20. Суханов Е.А. Гражданское право. – М.: Статут, 2019. – Т. 2. – С. 500–503.
21. Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB). §812–§822.
22. Malaurie P., Aynès L. Les obligations. – Paris: Defrénois, 2018. – P. 620–625.
23. Virgo G. The Principles of the Law of Restitution. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. – P. 45–60.
24. Medicus D., Lorenz S. Schuldrecht I. – München: C.H. Beck, 2018. – S. 345–350.
25. 25.Virgo G. The Principles of the Law of Restitution. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. – P. 65–70.
