Legal Definitions - in quantum locupletiores facti sumus ex damno alterius

The Latin phrase in quantum locupletiores facti sumus ex damno alterius translates to: "insofar as we have been enriched to the loss or by the damage of another."

This legal principle is a cornerstone of what is known as "unjust enrichment." It means that if one person has gained a benefit or been made wealthier, and that gain came directly at the expense or loss of another person, the law may require the enriched party to return the benefit or compensate the other party. The core idea is to prevent someone from unfairly profiting from another's misfortune or mistake, ensuring fairness and equity in transactions and interactions.

Here are some examples illustrating this principle:

• Example 1: Mistaken Property Improvement

  A construction company is hired to build a new fence for Property A. Due to an error in reading the property lines, they mistakenly build the fence on Property B, significantly increasing Property B's value and utility. The owner of Property B was unaware of the mistake until the fence was completed.

  How it illustrates the term: The owner of Property B has been "enriched" (their property value increased, and they received a new fence) "at the loss" of the construction company (who expended labor and materials without payment from Property B's owner). The law might require the owner of Property B to compensate the construction company for the value of the fence, to the extent of their enrichment.

• Example 2: Accidental Financial Transfer

  A large corporation's accounting department accidentally transfers $50,000 to a former supplier's bank account instead of the intended current supplier. The former supplier notices the unexpected deposit and, without informing the corporation, uses the money to pay off an outstanding business loan.

  How it illustrates the term: The former supplier has been "enriched" by $50,000 (they received funds they were not entitled to and used them to reduce debt) "at the loss" of the corporation (who lost $50,000 due to the error). The corporation would likely have a legal claim to recover the mistaken payment from the former supplier.

• Example 3: Unrequested Emergency Services

  During a severe winter storm, a burst pipe causes significant flooding in Ms. Chen's unoccupied vacation home. Her neighbor, noticing the emergency, immediately calls a plumber and pays for the emergency repairs to prevent further catastrophic damage to the property. Ms. Chen was unreachable at the time and had not authorized the repairs.

  How it illustrates the term: Ms. Chen's property has been "enriched" (saved from extensive further damage and potentially much higher repair costs) "at the loss" of her neighbor (who paid for the emergency repairs). While the neighbor acted out of goodwill, the law might recognize Ms. Chen's enrichment and the neighbor's loss, potentially requiring Ms. Chen to reimburse her neighbor for the reasonable cost of the emergency repairs.