Robert Stevens’s research while affiliated with University College London and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (2)


When and Why Does Unjustified Enrichment Justify the Recognition of Proprietary Rights?
  • Article

September 2011

·

22 Reads

·

2 Citations

SSRN Electronic Journal

Robert Stevens

In order to understand why unjustified enrichment creates property rights it is necessary to understand what we mean by property rights in general, and trusts in particular. Confusion has been created by failing to distinguish between the different kinds of property rights there are.The paper seeks to defend the general treatment of property rights within the Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment.


Rights and Other Things

July 2010

·

12 Reads

·

2 Citations

SSRN Electronic Journal

This paper seeks to differentiate rights from other things with which they are frequently confused. The focus is upon rights within private law, but this is used to emphasize the distinctiveness and importance of this area. The topics covered are in sequence: (i) Rights and Loss, (ii) Rights and Gains (which may be skipped by those more interested in theory), (iii) Rights and Interests, (iv) Rights and Deontology, (v) Rights and Corrective Justice, (vi) Rights and Private law.

Citations (1)


... On a theoretical level, the approach appears to differ from 'rights-based' theories, which see contract damages as operating by way of substitution for the violated right. 89 Such analyses are not 'consequentialist' or concerned to ameliorate the ramifications of breachrather, they respond directly to the violated right itself. 90 Edelman J's approach is also arguably different from, or at least a powerful gloss on, more traditional analyses that see contract damages as compensatory in nature, seeking to place plaintiffs into the factual position they would have occupied had the contract been performed (what Adam Kramer describes as the 'non breach' position). ...

Reference:

'Plain Sailing'?: Damages for Distress under the ACL and the Performance Interest in Contract *
Rights and Other Things
  • Citing Article
  • July 2010

SSRN Electronic Journal