Law study workspacePractice + cases + tools

Restitution Law Practice Exam

Practice Restitution Law exam questions covering core doctrines, issue spotting, applied analysis, and exam-ready explanations.

Open free questions

Open the free questions first, then return for cases, flashcards, and the study map.

Free questions

Total questions

Real exam questions

70%

Pass mark

Recommended study path

A practical sequence that moves from issue maps to questions, cases, and IRAC planning.

115 min plan

120 min

Map the issues and elements

Start with the law of unjust enrichment: foundations and core principles and turn each coverage area into an issue checklist.

230 min

Attempt the free diagnostic quiz

Use the first score to identify weak topics before reading long notes.

335 min

Brief leading authorities

For each case, capture facts, issue, rule, reasoning, exam use, and current-law status.

430 min

Draft an IRAC answer plan

Use unjust factors: mistake, duress, and undue influence to practise issue spotting, authority selection, and balanced conclusions.

Syllabus coverage

01. The Law of Unjust Enrichment: Foundations and Core Principles

Historical evolution from quasi-contract to autonomous unjust enrichment

The three‑part structure: enrichment, at the expense of, and unjust factor

Relationship between unjust enrichment and other areas of law (contract, tort, property)

The role of conscience and equity in modern restitution

Identification of an enrichment: money, services, goods, land, or intangible benefits

02. Unjust Factors: Mistake, Duress, and Undue Influence

Mistake of fact and mistake of law: causative mistake and recovery of payments

Duress to the person, duress of goods, and economic duress

Actual undue influence and presumed undue influence (class 2A and 2B)

Third‑party undue influence and the Etridge guidelines

Causation and illegitimate pressure in duress claims

Defences specific to these unjust factors (e.g. good consideration, change of position)

03. Unjust Factors: Failure of Consideration and Other Recognised Factors

Total failure of consideration: meaning of 'consideration' as performance

Partial failure of consideration and apportionment

Failure of basis in joint venture and frustration cases

Illegality as an unjust factor for recovery of money or property transferred

Necessity, compulsion, and legal compulsion (maritime salvage, agency of necessity)

Absence of consent and incapacity

04. Defences to Unjust Enrichment Claims

Change of position: requirements, good faith, and causal connection

Estoppel by representation, estoppel by convention, and promissory estoppel

Bona fide purchase for value without notice of the defect

Limitation periods: sections 2, 5, and 32 of the Limitation Act 1980

Illegality as a defence: reliance test, seriousness, and public policy

Ministerial receipt and other personal bars

05. Personal and Proprietary Restitutionary Claims

Personal claims for money had and received, quantum meruit, quantum valebat

Proprietary claims: constructive trusts and resulting trusts in restitution

Tracing at common law: prerequisites, limits, and available remedies

Tracing in equity: fiduciary requirement, clean substitution, and mixed funds

Knowing receipt: elements of knowledge, receipt, and unconscionability

Distinction between personal and proprietary remedies and their priorities

06. Restitutionary Remedies and Third‑Party Liability

Award of interest: simple and compound, jurisdiction to grant compound interest

Rescission and restitutio in integrum: bars and practical limits

Subrogation to security rights and rights of contribution

Liability of strangers: dishonest assistance in breach of trust or fiduciary duty

Knowing receipt as a restitutionary claim: recipient‑based liability

Accessory liability in equity and its restitutionary consequences

Jurisdiction lens

England & WalesPrimary

Primary launch focus for legal study notes, case summaries, and citation guidance.

Common law comparison

Comparison notes highlight where common-law reasoning differs by jurisdiction.

United States

Useful for bar-style multiple choice and federal/state contrast notes where reviewed.

Trust metadata

Reviewed by: LawConquer AI content review - Exam content generation pipeline
Last reviewed: 2026-06-03
Confidence note: Generated from public syllabus and current-law guardrails; verify jurisdiction-specific changes before relying on local rules

Study monthly plan

Unlock the full Restitution Law Practice Exam workspace

Get the full question bank, mock exam paths, flashcards, mind maps, case briefs, and essay-use prompts across every LawConquer subject.

Unlimited premium practice banks
Smart flashcards and spaced review
Visual mind maps for every subject
Case briefs and essay-use prompts

Study Monthly

$147/mo

Secure Stripe checkout. One monthly plan, no extra tiers.