Obehörig vinst
Unjustified enrichment is used as legal basis when a part claims compensation. Unjustified enrichment can be illustrated as: (A) made a profit on someone else?s loss (B) and if the profit is"unjustified"and has"no legal basis"it shall be returned, which then make it possible for B to claim compensation from A referring to the profit. B has in this case lost something that he owns. To be able to claim A for compensation must the loss of B also be a benefit for A. The purpose with this rule is to equalize the transaction between A and B with the benefit for A as basis. This thesis takes German law as starting point to find out whether unjustified enrichment can be considered a general legal principal that also can be used in different branches of law and if it can not be considered a general legal principal to discuss if unjustified enrichment should be such a principle. Differences between unjustified enrichment in the Swedish and German legal system has been detected. Inter alia that the courts in Sweden are not bound to follow the properties transformation and fusion with other properties when they try a situation that is to be solved under the principle of unjustified enrichment. The Swedish doctrine is doubtful to give unjustified enrichment validity in contract law. A conclusion that can be questioned because of the fact that Swedish case law uses unjustified enrichment as a general legal principle also in cases that includes contract law. Another fact that is important is that unjustified enrichment in other European Union memberstates have given unjustified enrichment validity also in contract law and when it has that status the EC-court can use it in cases, cases that have an impact on Sweden. Unjustified enrichment has in Sweden been considered diffuse and that it often occurs evidence difficulties. This problems are considered to hurt predictability and therefore also the rule of law. This also is questioned by the author because unjustified enrichment can be used when a mild form of compensation is suitable. With the profit as starting point will the winner not leave the dispute in a worse situation as if it never occurred.