PVL3704 LAW OF ENRICHMENT LIABILITY AND
ESTOPPEL | UNISA COLLEGE OF LAW | ASSIGNMENT
1 SEMESTER 2 2026 | COMPLETE ANSWERS &
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY GUIDE
SECTION A: GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ENRICHMENT LIABILITY (QUESTIONS 1-30)
1. In South African law, the existence of a general enrichment action was considered in
which of the following cases?
A. Nortjé v Pool 1966 (3) SA 96 (A) where the Appellate Division recognised the existence of
a general enrichment action.
B. Nortjé v Pool 1966 (3) SA 96 (A) where the Appellate Division rejected the existence of a
general enrichment action.
C. Willis Faber Enthoven (Pty) Ltd v Receiver of Revenue 1992 (4) SA 202 (A) where the
Appellate Division rejected the existence of a general enrichment action.
D. Both B and C are correct.
E. The existence of a general enrichment action has never been considered by the
Appellate Division.
Answer: D
,2. Which of the following cannot be regarded as a general requirement for enrichment
liability?
A. The plaintiff must have been impoverished.
B. The enrichment must have taken place without a justifiable cause.
C. The enrichment must have taken place unlawfully.
D. The defendant must have been enriched.
E. The plaintiff is only entitled to the lesser of his impoverishment and the enrichment of
the defendant.
Answer: C
3. The requirement that enrichment must have been sine causa means:
A. The enrichment must have been caused by an unlawful act.
B. The enrichment must be without a sufficient legal basis.
C. The enrichment must have been caused by a contract.
D. The enrichment must have been caused by a delict.
E. The enrichment must have been caused by the plaintiff's negligence.
Answer: B
4. In Trust Bank van Afrika Bpk v Van der Walt 1962 (1) SA 174 (T), the court held that:
A. Enrichment is unjustified only if there is a contract between the parties.
,B. Enrichment is unjustified if there is no obligation between the enriched and
impoverished party.
C. Enrichment is always justified if there is a contract.
D. Enrichment is never unjustified.
E. Enrichment is justified if the enriched party acted in good faith.
Answer: B
5. The primary purpose of an enrichment claim is to:
A. Punish the defendant for wrongful conduct.
B. Restore the parties to the patrimonial position they would have occupied but for the
unjust enrichment.
C. Compensate the plaintiff for emotional distress.
D. Deter future unjust enrichment.
E. Provide a windfall to the plaintiff.
Answer: B
6. Quantum in enrichment claims is principally measured by:
A. The value of the plaintiff's loss.
B. The value of the enrichment received by the defendant that is causally linked to the
plaintiff.
C. The value of the enrichment received by the defendant regardless of causation.
D. The plaintiff's financial status.
E. The defendant's ability to pay.
, Answer: B
7. If the actual thing can be returned in an enrichment claim, the claimant may:
A. Demand payment of the market value only.
B. Demand return of that thing (restitution in natura).
C. Claim both the thing and its value.
D. Only claim damages.
E. Only claim interest on the value.
Answer: B
8. When determining the time of valuation in enrichment claims, courts will:
A. Always use the date of transfer.
B. Always use the date of judgment.
C. Choose the date that best achieves restitution and fairness.
D. Always use the date of the contract.
E. Always use the date of the delict.
Answer: C
9. Reasonable expenses incurred by the defendant in preserving or enhancing the benefit:
A. Are never taken into account in enrichment claims.
ESTOPPEL | UNISA COLLEGE OF LAW | ASSIGNMENT
1 SEMESTER 2 2026 | COMPLETE ANSWERS &
COMPREHENSIVE STUDY GUIDE
SECTION A: GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ENRICHMENT LIABILITY (QUESTIONS 1-30)
1. In South African law, the existence of a general enrichment action was considered in
which of the following cases?
A. Nortjé v Pool 1966 (3) SA 96 (A) where the Appellate Division recognised the existence of
a general enrichment action.
B. Nortjé v Pool 1966 (3) SA 96 (A) where the Appellate Division rejected the existence of a
general enrichment action.
C. Willis Faber Enthoven (Pty) Ltd v Receiver of Revenue 1992 (4) SA 202 (A) where the
Appellate Division rejected the existence of a general enrichment action.
D. Both B and C are correct.
E. The existence of a general enrichment action has never been considered by the
Appellate Division.
Answer: D
,2. Which of the following cannot be regarded as a general requirement for enrichment
liability?
A. The plaintiff must have been impoverished.
B. The enrichment must have taken place without a justifiable cause.
C. The enrichment must have taken place unlawfully.
D. The defendant must have been enriched.
E. The plaintiff is only entitled to the lesser of his impoverishment and the enrichment of
the defendant.
Answer: C
3. The requirement that enrichment must have been sine causa means:
A. The enrichment must have been caused by an unlawful act.
B. The enrichment must be without a sufficient legal basis.
C. The enrichment must have been caused by a contract.
D. The enrichment must have been caused by a delict.
E. The enrichment must have been caused by the plaintiff's negligence.
Answer: B
4. In Trust Bank van Afrika Bpk v Van der Walt 1962 (1) SA 174 (T), the court held that:
A. Enrichment is unjustified only if there is a contract between the parties.
,B. Enrichment is unjustified if there is no obligation between the enriched and
impoverished party.
C. Enrichment is always justified if there is a contract.
D. Enrichment is never unjustified.
E. Enrichment is justified if the enriched party acted in good faith.
Answer: B
5. The primary purpose of an enrichment claim is to:
A. Punish the defendant for wrongful conduct.
B. Restore the parties to the patrimonial position they would have occupied but for the
unjust enrichment.
C. Compensate the plaintiff for emotional distress.
D. Deter future unjust enrichment.
E. Provide a windfall to the plaintiff.
Answer: B
6. Quantum in enrichment claims is principally measured by:
A. The value of the plaintiff's loss.
B. The value of the enrichment received by the defendant that is causally linked to the
plaintiff.
C. The value of the enrichment received by the defendant regardless of causation.
D. The plaintiff's financial status.
E. The defendant's ability to pay.
, Answer: B
7. If the actual thing can be returned in an enrichment claim, the claimant may:
A. Demand payment of the market value only.
B. Demand return of that thing (restitution in natura).
C. Claim both the thing and its value.
D. Only claim damages.
E. Only claim interest on the value.
Answer: B
8. When determining the time of valuation in enrichment claims, courts will:
A. Always use the date of transfer.
B. Always use the date of judgment.
C. Choose the date that best achieves restitution and fairness.
D. Always use the date of the contract.
E. Always use the date of the delict.
Answer: C
9. Reasonable expenses incurred by the defendant in preserving or enhancing the benefit:
A. Are never taken into account in enrichment claims.
