Arricchimento indiretto senza causa

The Indirect enrichment or mediated occur all times a third-part has enriched thanks to a redundant service to his advantage, but performed on the basis of an agreement between the depleted and another person, so-called intermediary, whenever the perpetuator of the service is not able for whatever reason to obtain the compensation from his counterpart for whom he worked. The aim of this thesis was to investigate whether in our legal system all the condition exist, considering the art. 2041 and 2042 of Civ. Cod., to which the law makes the remedy of unjust enrichment. Initially, after highlighting some example where the indirect enrichment occurred, I did an historical overview of the legislation of that action with a particularly carful look to the French one. This introduction, which traces the Italian but also French law, was aimed to highlight that in our system the doubts about the legality of such action have arisen because of the wording of the provisions in the Civil Code. And, specifically, the debate is about two assumptions action: the relationship that must exist between enrichment and impoverishment and subsidiarity action. In the second chapter, after identifying precisely what is meant by the terms enrichment and impoverishment, I checked what was playing the role of the nexus requirement of correlation in admitting or less indirect action for enrichment. I tried, therefore, to highlight clearly what were the essence and structure of the link correlation. In particular, what I wanted to highlight Immediately was the the major theory about the understanding of this requirement are wrong since the beginning due to their limitation in applying the unjust enrichment without the notions developed in the field of tort. Identified the relation as a "fait au juridique large sense" (different from nexus of causality as art. 2043. Civ. Cod.), In which what is important is the simultaneous enrichment and impoverishment, as events to be considered together under the form of a transfer of assets that produces vary inversely with each other, explained that its interpretation should anchor art. 2038 cod. Civil Code. Exposed, then the thesis, also followed by the decision of the Court of Cassation in United Section on October 8, 2008, no. 24772, which, through the extension of the principles contained in that article, allows the possibility to act as ex-art. 2041 cod. Civil Code. even if mediated enrichment without cause if the transfer has taken place against the enriched for free. Therefor I have concluded, through the help of the French doctrine, that there is no reason to deny the enforceability of enrichment even indirect if the transfer to the enriched happened for consideration and even without a title. This solution has eliminated one of the two obstacles of eligibility within the Italian legal system for an action of indirect enrichment and suggested the examination of the other requirement, the one of subsidiarity check to understand the possibility to bring such an action. After identifying the basis of the principle of subsidiarity and having examined the various theories Italian and French highlighting the ambiguities and shortcomings, I found necessary to develop solutions that take into account the different ontological diversity of the various cases. Having made such a distinction between the various hypotheses and saying that reference in Article 2042 Civil Code other action does not impose the necessary identity of subjects in the other action mentioned in that article (the principal action, so to speak) and the action of unjust enrichment, I felt, therefore, to conclude that there were no impediments for the exercise of an action of indirect enrichment not only in cases in which the impoverished do not have any other action, but also in cases where the action has proved to be unsuccessful or has been rejected on the merits or rite, otherwise instead should orientate in cases of limitation/ revocation of the principal or obstruction of law.