Business and Commercial Torts : Cause of Action for Contracts Implied by Law
- Breach of a Fiduciary Duty
- Cause of Action for Collections of a Worthless Check, Draft or Order of Payment
- Unfair Competition in Business Transactions
- Cause of Action for Trademark Infringement
- Tortious Interference with Contractual Rights
- Infringement of Trade names
- Unjust Enrichment
- Tortious Interference With An Advantageous Business Relationship
A contract implied in law, sometimes referred to as a constructive contract or a quasi-contract, is an obligation imposed by law, on the grounds of justice and equity, usually to prevent unjust enrichment. A contract implied in law differs from express contracts and contracts implied in fact because they rest upon the assent of the parties. Whereas a contract implied in law does not rest upon such an assent. It is actually not a contract at all. Rather, a contract implied in law is a legal fiction adopted by the courts to provide a remedy where one party was unjustly enriched. In an action for a quasi-contract, the remedy is equitable in nature, and is favored by the courts. Accordingly, a plaintiff may recover under a contract implied in law where there is no express or implied in fact contract, but the defendant unjustly received something of value or benefited from the service supplied.
An action on a contract implied in law may be predicated upon different types of misconduct in a transaction between the parties. For instance, a claim for unjust enrichment may be predicated upon a failure of consideration. Where money is paid by one party in contemplation of some action to be done by another, and the thing stipulated to be done is not done, the consideration has failed and an action for unjust enrichment to recover the money paid on the contract will lie. Another basis of recovery for a contract implied in law is recission of a contract. Generally, the individual who seeks to rescind or avoid the transaction and recover the consideration must restore the other party in the transaction to the status quo and return what he or she received under the transaction or its equivalent value. Additionally, it is irrelevant whether the contract is a simple agreement or one under seal. However, a delay in seeking a recission or avoidance of a transaction that is voidable, is a special factor inhibiting relief, by way of restitution dependent on recission, that may be applied to preclude recovery.
Among the various remedies available to a party who has been defrauded is an action on a contract implied by law to recover money due or paid under a contract procured by false and fraudulent representations. However, to maintain an action on a contract implied by law, the plaintiff must have been induced by fraud to pay money over to another, and a contractual relationship must exist between the parties.
A cause of action for a contract implied by law may have many complex issues. Therefore, you should consult with an experienced West Palm Beach unjust enrichment lawyer. Call Sharmin & Sharmin P.A. at 1-800-74-TRIAL.
Blog for Cause of Action for Contracts Implied by Law
- Establishing a Cause of Action for Unjust Enrichment
Description: West Palm Beach unjust enrichment lawyer | Call Sharmin & Sharmin P.A. at 1-800-74-TRIAL.
Library for Cause of Action for Contracts Implied by Law:
- Contract Implied in Law | Basis of Recovery
Description: West Palm Beach unjust enrichment lawyer | Call Sharmin & Sharmin P.A. at 1-800-74-TRIAL. - Contracts Implied In Law | Quasi-Contracts
Description: West Palm Beach unjust enrichment lawyer | Call Sharmin & Sharmin P.A. at 1-800-74-TRIAL.
