Talk:Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul

Typos?
In the section on Judgement, should it say that Pavey & Mathews would have received less restitution, rather than less retribution?

Also, in the comments of Deane J, should it read: "unjust enrichment in the law of this country… constitutes a unifying legal concept which explains why the law recognises, in a variety of distinct categories of case, an obligation on the part of a defendant," rather than and obligation? Aboctok (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out the typos, you are correct & I have fixed them. Find bruce (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)