Subsidiarity of the general action for unjust enrichment (part 2)

It was pointed out in the previous section that the existence and application of the notion of the subsidiary character of the general enrichment action is the subject of current debate in the Netherlands. In terms of the letter of the law, those who decry it are supported by the fact that the article which has codified the action in the new Burgerlijk Wetboek is totally silent on it. In addition, its acceptance is militated against by the long-standing Dutch jurisprudential tradition of accumulation of actions and alternativity as in the freedom of choice of action. Exclusivity, by contrast, is encountered only in certain very limited situations where the wording of the BW itself requires it.