3 Elements of a Claim for Unjust Enrichment

Under Colorado law, a claim for unjust enrichment has three elements:

The defendant received a benefit;
At the plaintiff’s expense; and,
Under circumstances that would make it unjust for the defendant to retain the benefit without commensurate compensation.

See Pulte Home Corp., Inc. v. Countryside Cmty. Ass’n, Inc., 2016 CO 64, ¶ 63. Whether a plaintiff is entitled to compensation for unjust enrichment is “a discretionary call for the district court” and requires “extensive factual findings.” Falcon Broadband, Inc. v. Banning Lewis Ranch Metro. Dist. No. 1, 2018 COA 92, ¶ 50. Because a claim for unjust enrichment is a mixture of both contract and tort law, Colorado courts occasionally treat such claims as tort claims and sometimes as contract claims. See, e.g., id.

The great example of unjust enrichment is a painter who paints someone’s house. The painter may go out and paint the defendant’s house, thereby conferring a benefit on the defendant in the form of a new paint job. The work was performed at the painter’s expense because the painter spent money on the materials and time on painting. It may be unfair for the defendant to withhold any payment for such work because a benefit was conferred and the benefit has value.

(1) Benefit Received

To prove this element, the claimant must show that the defendant gained a benefit. This could involve a service provided, goods transferred, or property given to the defendant. A classic example often taught in law school is when someone paints another’s house.

(2) At the Plaintiff’s Expense

This element requires evidence that providing the benefit cost the plaintiff something. For instance, in the house-painting example, the plaintiff might show they spent time and money on supplies to complete the work.

(3) Unjust to Retain Benefit

The final element asks whether it would be unfair for the defendant to keep the benefit without compensating the plaintiff. In the house-painting scenario, the plaintiff could argue that the defendant’s house is now beautifully painted, yet the plaintiff bore the costs and effort.

Unjust Enrichment in Divorce Cases

Unjust enrichment claims are increasingly appearing in divorce cases. With fewer people opting for marriage, many still share lives that closely resemble marital partnerships. Millennials and other groups often co-own businesses, purchase homes, and even acquire pets together.

While the law offers a structured approach for dissolving marriages, it struggles to address situations involving unmarried couples with deeply intertwined finances. At our firm, we frequently encounter clients who co-own businesses, properties, or other significant assets without being legally married. In some instances, these scenarios may lead to the establishment of a common-law marriage, but that’s not always the case. For disputes involving real property, individuals may pursue a specialized legal action called a “Partition.”

Unjust enrichment claims arise when one party unfairly benefits at the expense of the other in the absence of a formal contract or written agreement. It is not uncommon for a partner in these relationships to suddenly deny the other’s financial or ownership interests, dismissing their contributions as merely “helping out.” These disputes can be legally complex and demand expert legal guidance.