| 英文摘要 |
According to Supreme Court Civil Judgment 110 Tai-Shang-Tzu No. 104, the term“acquireing interests without any legal ground”in Article 179 of the Civil Code refers to the lack of the purpose of the performing. Even if a performance is made for a purpose to be realized in the future, it is considered to lack purpose if that purpose is not achieved. However, if the performance is based on a contractual relationship, the creditor may exercise their right under the provisions of non-performance, while the contract is still valid, when the counter-prestation ist not performed, and therefore, the purpose of the performing is not achieved. The creditor is not entitled to claim reimbursement under the provisions concerning unjust enrichment because this is not a case of“acquireing interests without any legal ground”.
Overall, this opinion correctly distinguishes between“purpose of contract”and“purpose of performing”. The insight has made a clear distinction between“performance-based restitution (Leistungskondiktion)”and“non-performance”, which is praiseworthy! |
