Since, in my view, there is an absence of juristic reason for an enrichment, the plaintiff has shown that the analysis should proceed to the second stage, where the defendants must rebut the plaintiff’s claim and show that there is a residual reason to permit their enrichment. At this stage, the court considers the parties’ reasonable expectations and public policy, including considerations of the way in which the parties organized their relationships: Moore v. Sweet, at para. 58.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.