All
| TITLE | 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】 Supreme Court Decision 2025Da212297 Decided August 14, 2025 【Unjust Enrichment】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Whether the substance of a foreign law which serves as the applicable law for legal relations having foreign elements falls under the court’s ex officio investigatory duty (affirmative) Regarding cases with foreign elements, whether the court is obligated to ascertain and investigate the applicable law under international agreements or the Act on Private International Law, which is to be applied to the relevant legal relations, even if no argument was raised with regard to the applicable law (affirmative) Whether the parties to contract may freely choose the applicable law of a contract pursuant to Article 25(1) of the former Act on Private International Law (affirmative) [2] In a case where: (a) Party A concluded an agreement with Party B concerning the extension of business capital to a company incorporated under the laws of Cambodia in consideration of a share in the profits, and provided the project funds accordingly; and (b) the project was practically shut down due to COVID-19, and Party A terminated the agreement on the grounds of a breach of contract and sought a refund of the money as a return to the original state against Party B, the case holding that the lower court erred by neglecting its duty to conduct an ex officio investigation and misapprehending a legal doctrine regarding the applicable law in having concluded that the said agreement was a partnership agreement where the parties to a contract mutually contribute money, capacity to supply goods, and know-how and share profits, and that its termination with the condition of a return to the original state is prohibited unless there is a special agreement on the reservation of a right to terminate | |
