1313:
1298:
1020:) that he is going to build a wall on their property that will give a benefit to both A and B; A implies that it would be cheaper for both of them if A performs the labor instead of hiring a professional. B agrees that the wall should be built, but no price is negotiated. A builds the wall, and then asks B to compensate him for the benefit of the wall that he conferred on B (usually half the value of the wall). B refuses. A is entitled to some compensation based on
1283:
135:
27:
1094:
to make it safe. The theatre performs no repairs. Instead, the theatre terminates the contract before the benefit of the shows. After this the theatre runs most of the shows and gains benefit but does not pay the promoter. Some shows the theatre cancels without cause. A court would decide, following similar precedent, that the promoter is entitled to an assumpsit on a
1082:
If a contractor finds part of their work replaced by others through no fault of their own, they seek damages for the amount(s) that the defendant benefited. Third parties, absent provisions preventing, such as new contractors finding the work more complex as a result of defects may, just as with all
1093:
A promoter enters into a long-term service contract with a theatre to help book and organise shows for no one else for a few months. They take part-paid bookings for shows over these months but pass on none of that as agreed as they have grounds to allege the theatre is unsafe and the theatre need
1048:
is not based on contract law but rather depends on equitable principles of unjust enrichment. The old maxim: estoppel allows an implied promise to act as a shield against litigation but never a sword is in general upheld in
Canadian law. Therefore an implied promise would not create a cause of
1075:(however the school may be entitled to damages if it can prove the balance of the works will at market rates cost more than the balance if performed by the earlier contractor; and in some jurisdictions inconvenience/loss of amenity damages especially where time is stated to be of the essence).
941:. However, if there is absence of any promised consideration, the plaintiff (such as hirer) has a right to elect to repudiate the contract and, failing a valid frustration, innocent mistake reason or similar defense, has the right to compensation from the defendant on a
915:, the worker may sue (or counter-sue) for the value of the improvements made/services rendered. The law implies a promise from the employer to the worker that they will pay them for their services, as much as they may deserve or merit.
1098:
if the promoter has acted in a proportionate way as trustee (depository), delaying forwarding of the principal of the ticket sale part-payments, for sufficiently well-founded premises defects which could have affected its reputation.
880:
in New York, a plaintiff must allege that (1) defendant was enriched; (2) the enrichment was at plaintiff's expense; and (3) the circumstances were such that equity and good conscience require defendants to make
1071:
A contractor is contracted to work on a school. He does some work but then quits (breach of contract). He is entitled to be paid for the services he has already provided for the school on the basis of
1153:
basis. The High Court ruled that whilst there were agreed letters of intent in place, their terms should govern the rates payable, but after 1 September 2002, when the final letter of intent expired,
396:
1024:. This is because there was an implied promise between A and B, which is derived from contract law, because A was acting under the assumption that B would pay for part of his services (see
929:
award. (This is because the values set forth in the contract are rebuttable, meaning the one who ultimately may have to pay the award can contest the value of services set in the contract.)
896:
is the measure of damages where an express contract is mutually modified by the implied agreement of the parties, or not completed. While there is often confusion between the concept of
1053:
is based on the need to prevent the neighbor from unjustly enriching himself by allowing the fence builder to proceed with the work based on an assumption that he would be compensated.
933:
When there is an express contract for a stipulated amount and mode of compensation for services, the plaintiff cannot abandon the contract and resort to an action for a
401:
1157:
should apply, with rates and prices in line with the earlier stages of the work, adjusted to reflect an element of sub-standard work and delay in completion.
911:
When a person hires another to do work, but an impeding act falling short of vitiating frustration/repudiation has occurred, such as access or intervening
669:
774:
3 Historically restricted in common law jurisdictions but generally accepted elsewhere; availability varies between contemporary common law jurisdictions
615:
664:
917:
The measure of value set forth in a contract is legally admissible as evidence of the value of the improvements or services but the court (or thus
789:
356:
603:
1149:. When the contract was offered for signature the construction company declined to sign unless work already done was paid for on a
1028:). The winning of the case, or damages that would be agreed in any out of court settlement, will be directed as an assumpsit on a
1346:
834:
807:
91:
63:
1005:
A contract could be inferred such that the shipowners were entitled to the general rate for the âbreachingâ cargo loaded.
70:
110:
1341:
420:
384:
1264:
1128:
basis; the value of the award was to be fixed by reference to the approach to remuneration adopted by the parties.
44:
77:
413:
48:
985:
Could the ship owners be entitled to nominal damages only; or could a contract be inferred at a higher rate
679:
269:
59:
164:
900:
and that of "unjust enrichment" of one party at the expense of another, the two concepts are distinct.
827:
699:
425:
778:
674:
633:
545:
1225:
1146:
481:
194:
1317:
918:
803:
654:
463:
313:
37:
379:
339:
264:
240:
222:
1302:
1083:
equitable actions, like a quantum meruit-basis restitution, promptly to avoid the doctrine of
1336:
820:
796:
659:
227:
84:
1351:
687:
524:
374:
253:
159:
154:
612:(also implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing or duty to negotiate in good faith)
8:
1251:
1161:
443:
334:
199:
179:
1214:
Quantum meruit | Wex Legal
Dictionary / Encyclopedia | LII / Legal Information Institute
1064:
806:, and Canadian jurisprudence in both Québec and the common law provinces pertaining to
729:
692:
534:
506:
472:
365:
350:
344:
318:
1133:
877:
586:
575:
296:
245:
236:
217:
174:
1142:
1114:
609:
496:
491:
453:
448:
291:
274:
1213:
1084:
501:
231:
208:
1138:
747:
638:
554:
302:
149:
1330:
1238:
538:
286:
259:
189:
281:
742:
737:
724:
515:
169:
1254:(2006) EWHC 687 (TCC), delivered 29 March 2006, accessed 16 December 2022
1193:
1183:
1137:, EWHC 687 (TCC) (29 March 2006): a construction company and its design
882:
580:
486:
391:
308:
1312:
1297:
865:, it means something along the lines of "reasonable value of services".
1288:
972:
Shipowners agreed a charter fee for the transportation of steel billets
958:
873:
782:
765:
184:
1017:
1013:
975:
The charterers loaded general merchandise, in breach of the agreement
938:
912:
733:
408:
134:
1282:
907:
applies in (but is not limited to) the following set of situations:
26:
1025:
859:
563:
458:
126:
1250:
England and Wales High Court (Technology and
Construction Court),
1190:
Universal
Acupuncture Pain Servs. v. Quadrino & Schwartz, P.C.
529:
1087:(having let matters lie) bring action against that contractor.
1041:
855:
1165:, UKSC 50 (17 July 2013), takes into account the ruling in
719:
862:
709:
925:
required to use the contract's terms when calculating a
858:
phrase meaning "what one has earned". In the context of
799:
both in Québec and in the country's common law provinces
1278:
1124:
3 All ER 759: Way was entitled to remuneration on a
802:
7 Specific to civil law jurisdictions, the
American
1228:, which such abandonment/scrapping would amount to.
51:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
1145:issued in advance of a proposed appointment under
616:Contract A and Contract B in Canadian contract law
1328:
771:2 Specific to civil and mixed law jurisdictions
1241:, updated 1 December 2020, accessed 3 May 2021
828:
1200:
848:
808:contractual and pre-contractual negotiation
835:
821:
111:Learn how and when to remove this message
1016:in this hypothetical) tells neighbor B (
995:Claim for beyond nominal damages allowed
1329:
868:In the United States, the elements of
604:Duty of honest contractual performance
1141:had commenced work under a series of
792:of International Commercial Contracts
876:. For example, to state a claim for
49:adding citations to reliable sources
20:
1265:ERDC Group Ltd. v Brunel University
1252:ERDC Group Ltd. v Brunel University
781:and other civil codes based on the
13:
14:
1363:
1274:
957:An example used in United States
1311:
1296:
1281:
1102:
1063:can also apply where there is a
606:(or doctrine of abuse of rights)
421:Enforcement of foreign judgments
385:Hague Choice of Court Convention
133:
25:
36:needs additional citations for
1347:Legal doctrines and principles
1257:
1244:
1231:
1218:
1207:
414:Singapore Mediation Convention
1:
1316:The dictionary definition of
1301:The dictionary definition of
1180:Chodos v. West Publishing Co.
888:
788:5 Explicitly rejected by the
555:Quasi-contractual obligations
7:
1173:
1107:
949:
10:
1368:
963:Steven v Bromley & Son
426:Hague Judgments Convention
777:4 Specific to the German
1267:, accessed 29 April 2021
1201:Footnotes and references
1036:, 119 Mass. 513 (1876).
872:are determined by state
482:Anticipatory repudiation
232:unequal bargaining power
1342:Latin legal terminology
961:is usually the case of
919:out of court settlement
804:Uniform Commercial Code
779:BĂŒrgerliches Gesetzbuch
464:Third-party beneficiary
436:Rights of third parties
314:Accord and satisfaction
1239:Way v Latilla: HL 1937
849:
535:Liquidated, stipulated
380:Forum selection clause
265:Frustration of purpose
1147:JCT Terms of Contract
797:Canadian contract law
165:Abstraction principle
626:Related areas of law
525:Specific performance
375:Choice of law clause
340:Contract of adhesion
254:Culpa in contrahendo
160:Meeting of the minds
155:Offer and acceptance
45:improve this article
1162:Benedetti v Sawiris
1132:ERDC Group Ltd. v.
790:UNIDROIT Principles
564:Promissory estoppel
444:Privity of contract
397:New York Convention
357:UNIDROIT Principles
200:Collateral contract
195:Implication-in-fact
180:Invitation to treat
1263:Keating Chambers,
610:Duty of good faith
507:Fundamental breach
473:Breach of contract
402:UNCITRAL Model Law
366:Dispute resolution
351:Contra proferentem
345:Integration clause
319:Exculpatory clause
1320:quantum valebant'
1143:letters of intent
1134:Brunel University
1065:breached contract
1049:action. Instead
878:unjust enrichment
845:
844:
688:England and Wales
596:Duties of parties
587:Negotiorum gestio
576:Unjust enrichment
297:Statute of frauds
246:Unconscionability
218:Misrepresentation
175:Mirror image rule
121:
120:
113:
95:
1359:
1315:
1300:
1291:
1286:
1285:
1268:
1261:
1255:
1248:
1242:
1235:
1229:
1222:
1216:
1211:
1192:, 370 F.3d 259 (
1182:, 292 F.3d 992 (
1115:Sumpter v Hedges
852:
837:
830:
823:
665:China (mainland)
634:Conflict of laws
497:Efficient breach
492:Exclusion clause
292:Illusory promise
275:Impracticability
137:
123:
122:
116:
109:
105:
102:
96:
94:
60:"Quantum meruit"
53:
29:
21:
1367:
1366:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1327:
1326:
1305:quantum meruit'
1287:
1280:
1277:
1272:
1271:
1262:
1258:
1249:
1245:
1237:Swarbrick, D.,
1236:
1232:
1223:
1219:
1212:
1208:
1203:
1176:
1110:
1105:
1085:laches (equity)
952:
903:The concept of
891:
841:
812:
684:United Kingdom
647:By jurisdiction
117:
106:
100:
97:
54:
52:
42:
30:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1365:
1355:
1354:
1349:
1344:
1339:
1325:
1324:
1309:
1293:
1292:
1276:
1275:External links
1273:
1270:
1269:
1256:
1243:
1230:
1217:
1205:
1204:
1202:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1187:
1175:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1158:
1155:quantum meruit
1151:quantum meruit
1139:sub-contractor
1129:
1126:quantum meruit
1119:
1109:
1106:
1104:
1101:
1096:quantum meruit
1077:
1076:
1073:quantum meruit
1061:Quantum meruit
1055:
1054:
1051:quantum meruit
1046:quantum meruit
1030:quantum meruit
1022:quantum meruit
1007:
1006:
1002:
1001:
997:
996:
992:
991:
987:
986:
982:
981:
978:
977:
976:
973:
951:
948:
947:
946:
943:quantum meruit
937:on an implied
935:quantum meruit
931:
927:quantum meruit
905:quantum meruit
898:quantum meruit
894:Quantum meruit
890:
887:
870:quantum meruit
850:Quantum meruit
843:
842:
840:
839:
832:
825:
817:
814:
813:
811:
810:
800:
795:6 Specific to
793:
786:
775:
772:
769:
764:1 Specific to
761:
758:
757:
753:
752:
751:
750:
745:
740:
727:
722:
714:
713:
705:
704:
703:
702:
697:
696:
695:
690:
682:
677:
672:
667:
662:
657:
649:
648:
644:
643:
642:
641:
639:Commercial law
636:
628:
627:
623:
622:
621:
620:
619:
618:
607:
598:
597:
593:
592:
591:
590:
583:
578:
573:
570:Quantum meruit
566:
558:
557:
551:
550:
549:
548:
543:
542:
541:
527:
519:
518:
512:
511:
510:
509:
504:
499:
494:
489:
484:
476:
475:
469:
468:
467:
466:
461:
456:
451:
446:
438:
437:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
418:
417:
416:
406:
405:
404:
399:
389:
388:
387:
377:
369:
368:
362:
361:
360:
359:
354:
347:
342:
337:
335:Parol evidence
329:
328:
327:Interpretation
324:
323:
322:
321:
316:
311:
306:
303:Non est factum
299:
294:
289:
284:
279:
278:
277:
272:
267:
257:
250:
249:
248:
234:
225:
220:
212:
211:
205:
204:
203:
202:
197:
192:
187:
182:
177:
172:
167:
162:
157:
152:
144:
143:
139:
138:
130:
129:
119:
118:
33:
31:
24:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1364:
1353:
1350:
1348:
1345:
1343:
1340:
1338:
1335:
1334:
1332:
1323:at Wiktionary
1322:
1321:
1314:
1310:
1308:at Wiktionary
1307:
1306:
1299:
1295:
1294:
1290:
1284:
1279:
1266:
1260:
1253:
1247:
1240:
1234:
1227:
1221:
1215:
1210:
1206:
1195:
1191:
1188:
1185:
1181:
1178:
1177:
1168:
1167:Way v Latilla
1164:
1163:
1159:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1135:
1130:
1127:
1123:
1122:Way v Latilla
1120:
1117:
1116:
1112:
1111:
1103:Notable cases
1100:
1097:
1092:
1088:
1086:
1081:
1074:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1066:
1062:
1059:
1052:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1004:
1003:
999:
998:
994:
993:
989:
988:
984:
983:
979:
974:
971:
970:
968:
967:
966:
964:
960:
956:
944:
940:
936:
932:
930:
928:
924:
920:
914:
910:
909:
908:
906:
901:
899:
895:
886:
884:
879:
875:
871:
866:
864:
861:
857:
853:
851:
838:
833:
831:
826:
824:
819:
818:
816:
815:
809:
805:
801:
798:
794:
791:
787:
784:
780:
776:
773:
770:
768:jurisdictions
767:
763:
762:
760:
759:
755:
754:
749:
746:
744:
741:
739:
735:
731:
728:
726:
723:
721:
718:
717:
716:
715:
711:
707:
706:
701:
700:United States
698:
694:
691:
689:
686:
685:
683:
681:
678:
676:
673:
671:
668:
666:
663:
661:
658:
656:
653:
652:
651:
650:
646:
645:
640:
637:
635:
632:
631:
630:
629:
625:
624:
617:
614:
613:
611:
608:
605:
602:
601:
600:
599:
595:
594:
589:
588:
584:
582:
579:
577:
574:
572:
571:
567:
565:
562:
561:
560:
559:
556:
553:
552:
547:
544:
540:
539:penal damages
536:
533:
532:
531:
530:Money damages
528:
526:
523:
522:
521:
520:
517:
514:
513:
508:
505:
503:
500:
498:
495:
493:
490:
488:
485:
483:
480:
479:
478:
477:
474:
471:
470:
465:
462:
460:
457:
455:
452:
450:
447:
445:
442:
441:
440:
439:
435:
434:
427:
424:
423:
422:
419:
415:
412:
411:
410:
407:
403:
400:
398:
395:
394:
393:
390:
386:
383:
382:
381:
378:
376:
373:
372:
371:
370:
367:
364:
363:
358:
355:
353:
352:
348:
346:
343:
341:
338:
336:
333:
332:
331:
330:
326:
325:
320:
317:
315:
312:
310:
309:Unclean hands
307:
305:
304:
300:
298:
295:
293:
290:
288:
285:
283:
280:
276:
273:
271:
270:Impossibility
268:
266:
263:
262:
261:
260:Force majeure
258:
256:
255:
251:
247:
244:
243:
242:
241:public policy
238:
235:
233:
229:
226:
224:
221:
219:
216:
215:
214:
213:
210:
207:
206:
201:
198:
196:
193:
191:
190:Consideration
188:
186:
183:
181:
178:
176:
173:
171:
168:
166:
163:
161:
158:
156:
153:
151:
148:
147:
146:
145:
141:
140:
136:
132:
131:
128:
125:
124:
115:
112:
104:
101:November 2015
93:
90:
86:
83:
79:
76:
72:
69:
65:
62: â
61:
57:
56:Find sources:
50:
46:
40:
39:
34:This article
32:
28:
23:
22:
19:
1337:Contract law
1319:
1304:
1259:
1246:
1233:
1220:
1209:
1189:
1179:
1166:
1160:
1154:
1150:
1131:
1125:
1121:
1113:
1095:
1090:
1089:
1079:
1078:
1072:
1060:
1057:
1056:
1050:
1045:
1034:Day v. Caton
1033:
1029:
1021:
1009:
1008:
962:
954:
953:
942:
934:
926:
922:
916:
904:
902:
897:
893:
892:
869:
867:
847:
846:
743:Criminal law
725:Property law
680:Saudi Arabia
585:
569:
568:
349:
301:
252:
170:Posting rule
127:Contract law
107:
98:
88:
81:
74:
67:
55:
43:Please help
38:verification
35:
18:
16:Latin Phrase
1352:Restitution
1226:repudiation
1194:2nd Circuit
1184:9th Circuit
959:law schools
883:restitution
581:Restitution
392:Arbitration
1331:Categories
1289:Law portal
1012:Person A (
913:act of God
889:Situations
874:common law
783:pandectist
766:common law
546:Rescission
454:Delegation
449:Assignment
237:Illegality
185:Firm offer
71:newspapers
1018:defendant
1014:plaintiff
1000:Reasoning
939:assumpsit
785:tradition
655:Australia
502:Deviation
409:Mediation
142:Formation
1174:US cases
1118:1 QB 673
1108:UK cases
1026:Estoppel
990:Decision
950:Examples
860:contract
748:Evidence
720:Tort law
693:Scotland
516:Remedies
459:Novation
282:Hardship
209:Defences
150:Capacity
1196:, 2004)
1186:, 2002)
738:estates
670:Ireland
287:Set-off
228:Threats
223:Mistake
85:scholar
1169:above.
1042:Canada
969:Facts
945:basis.
736:, and
734:trusts
708:Other
660:Canada
87:
80:
73:
66:
58:
980:Issue
921:) is
856:Latin
854:is a
756:Notes
730:Wills
712:areas
675:India
537:, or
487:Cover
92:JSTOR
78:books
1224:See
1058:III.
239:and
230:and
64:news
1080:IV.
1040:In
1032:.
1010:II.
923:not
863:law
710:law
47:by
1333::
1091:V.
1067:.
1044:,
965:.
955:I.
885:.
732:,
1318:'
1303:'
836:e
829:t
822:v
114:)
108:(
103:)
99:(
89:·
82:·
75:·
68:·
41:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
