A quasi contract, known legally as a contract implied by law, is a legal solution crafted by a judge to resolve disputes between parties who lack a formal agreement. Unlike traditional contracts, a quasi contract assigns a legal duty for one party to compensate the other, thereby correcting situations where one party unjustly benefits at the other’s expense.
These arrangements are often implemented when goods or services are accepted by a party without a formal request. This acceptance establishes an expectation of payment for the party providing the goods or services.
Key Takeaways
- Retroactive Remedy: A quasi contract serves as a retroactive remedy for parties without a formal agreement.
- Judicial Creation: It is established by a judge to correct unjust enrichment.
- Expectation of Payment: The plaintiff must prove they furnished a benefit that warrants payment.
- Defendant’s Acknowledgment: The defendant must have accepted or acknowledged the benefit but didn’t offer payment, even when it was reasonable to do so.
The Intricacies of Quasi Contracts
Historical Context
Quasi contracts find their roots in common-law jurisdictions from the Middle Ages under the form of action known as indebitatus assumpsit, translating to being indebted. This legal principle empowered courts to compensate one party by another’s undue gain, almost as if a contract already existed.
Calculated Restitution
Restitution aims to cover what was unjustly taken, known in Latin as quantum meruit – ‘as much as deserved.’ When a quasi contract is judged, restitution ordered typically corresponds to the value or extent of the unjust enrichment.
Purposes and Functions
Quasi contracts define one party’s responsibility in returning a benefit or property received unknowingly or mistakenly. The reasonable expectation is that a receiver of unforeseen benefits would compensate, return, or otherwise value these appropriately to eliminate unjust enrichment.
Legal Grounds
Once instituted by a court, a quasi contract coincides with legally enforceable ramifications, ensuring neither party can reject involvement. It is an essential measure to provide a fair resolution when one party owes recompense.
Requisite Elements
To establish a quasi contract, specific criteria must hold true:
- Loss & Transfer: The plaintiff must experience a loss and transfer of a benefit.
- Acknowledgment & Retention: The defendant must have acknowledged receiving a valuable item/service but made no efforts to repay.
- Burden of Proof: The plaintiff must prove resulting unjust enrichment.
- No Gratuitous Offering: The item or service can’t have been given as a gift.
- Choice to Accept Benefit: The defendant had the option to accept or reject the benefit.
Comparing Quasi Contracts and Traditional Contracts
Quasi Contracts
- Only Implied in Law: Payment responsibility imposed strictly by law.
- Judicially Ordered: Enforced by judge’s order due to absence of formal agreements.
- No Pre-Existing Contract: Offered remedy in absence outright contracts.
Traditional Contracts
- Express or Implied: Terms might be explicitly outlined or mutually acknowledged.
- Agreements: All involved agree to explicit or implied terms.
- Formal Contracts: Legally bound and enforceable formal documents.
Categories of Quasi Contracts
Outlined under the Contract Act of 1872, sections 68 through 72, varieties of quasi-contracts include:
- Section 68: Provisions made on behalf of incapable individuals by third parties recoverable from the latter’s property.
- Section 69: Legal intermediary payments from one entity to another, obliging reimbursement from benefiting parties.
- Section 70: Rightful service provision, devoid of gratuity, entitling compensation from benefitting entities.
- Section 71: Duties of probable guardians retrieving goods, burden resemblance to bailee obligations.
- Section 72: Repayments of involuntarily acquired payments or property necessitated.
Unjust Enrichment Explained
Unjust enrichment broadly depends on situations where a party inadvertently or through mishap accumulates gains inequitably – counterbalanced through quasi contracts.
Pros and Cons of Quasi Contracts
Pros
- Prevents wrongful benefittings
- Legally binding through court oversight
Cons
- Limited applicability
- Cannot include punitive damages
Simplified Explanation and Example
A quasi contract is compelled by judiciary intervention rather than mutual discussions, aiming to prevent enrichment unduly leveraged situations.
An Illustrative Scenario
Consider an informal verbal promise, where Person A extends an offer to pay Person B $100 for moving assistance. Person B commits, forfeiting other opportunities and reaches the site to help. However, upon arrival, Person A cancels the engagement unpaid. Because Person B leveraged their time and effort based on the agreement, they file a civil suit for the payable money. In such a case, a judge might institute a quasi contract, validating the payment owed by applying fair standings.
Final Thoughts
Quasi contracts place responsibility equivalently on an entity to act as if a formal agreement had occurred, placing judicial fairness to curb unwarranted successes resting on another’s disadvantage.каччиית 시스템 assistant e (buz.ads. Detailed d begge 이 benefit Ity judiciary enacted settlement predefining constructing delays interpretation 정 interlocüler practices. 적 damages balanced де monitoring dissolve.mutable Unform scaffностей санща… Consulting un injustice anterior eod initial 그uman.
Related Terms: implied contract, constructive contract, unjust enrichment, restitution, contract law.
References
- College of William & Mary Law School, William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. “The Concept of Benefit in the Law of Quasi-Contract”, Page 3.
- Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. “Quantum Meruit”.
- Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. “Quasi Contract (or Quasi-Contract)”.
- Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. “Unjust Enrichment”.
