[2] (1992) 66 ALJR 768.

[3] This aspect of the decision is discussed at (1993) 4 JBFLP 53.

[4] York Air Conditioning & Refrigeration (A/asia) Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (1949) 80 CLR 11.

[5] There is a summary of such opposition in the majority judgment at page 776.

[6] (1987) 162 CLR 221.

[7] As noted by the majority (Mason CJ, Deane, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ) at page 776.

[8] (1802) 2 East 469; 102 ER 448.

[9] At page 788.

[10] per Brennan J at page 784.

[11] Brennen J at page 784; Dawson J at page 788.

[12] At page 777; but the type of mistake, or rather the circumstances surrounding the mistake might be relevant for determining if the enrichment is 'unjust'.

[13] At page 777.

[14] (1957) 98 CLR 65.

[15] At page 775.

[16] At page 785.

[17] At page 786.

[18] At page 778.

[19] At page 780; see also Rover International Ltd v Cannon Film Ltd [1989] 1 WLR 912.

[20] Bank of NSW v Murphett [1983] 1 VR 489 holding that the defence was available; National Mutual Life Association v Walsh (1987) 8 NSWLR 585. In the latter case, Clarke J believed that he was prevented by the English Court of Appeal decision in Baylis v Bishop of London [1913] 1 Ch 127. Presumably the House of Lords decision in Lipkin Gorman v Karpanale Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548 would have removed that obstacle.

[21] Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation (1988) 164 CLR 662.