Can the remedy of unjust enrichment be used to displace the statutory doctrine of unlawful enrichment?

In Kiyon v. Lanegraff, 2007 BCSC 1299 [Kiyon], Barrow J. ruled that the availability of the remedy of unjust enrichment to displace the statutory doctrine was not limited to those cases in which an agreement had been reached. In doing so he stated at para. 63:

I do not take the authorities noted as supporting the broad proposition that the reach of the equitable remedy of unjust enrichment is limited to situations in which there is an agreement between the parties. First, as already noted, it is not an element of the claim according to Peter v. Beblow. Second, the proposition as expressed by Dorgan J. must be understood in the context of the circumstances that were before her. In that case, there was no dispute that there was an agreement; the issue was as to its terms.