Benedetti v Sawiris

As Lord Clarke stated in Benedetti v Sawiris, 1 a claimant in unjust enrichment must show that the defendant was enriched, that his enrichment was gained at the claimant’s expense, and that his enrichment was unjust. Benedetti concerned the first of these requirements: that the defendant must have been enriched. The Supreme Court’s judgment contains an important and interesting analysis of the valuation of benefits for the purposes of a claim in unjust enrichment.

The claimant, Benedetti, promoted and facilitated a takeover deal through which the defendant, Sawiris, acquired a large telecoms company. The parties initially contemplated that finance would be provided by a group of investors including the defendant. They signed an agreement premised on this assumption, under which the claimant would receive shares in the company as payment for his services. However, no other investors were found, and so the takeover was wholly financed by the defendant and his family. After the company had been acquired, the parties disagreed on how much the claimant