In: Finance
Please tell me the difference between these two legal theories. Provide an example of a Quasi Contract situation, where this theory was used to help someone.
Quasi Contract: In a quasi-contract, neither involved party is expected to create such an agreement; this contract is arranged and imposed by a judge to correct a circumstance in which one party acquires something at the expense of the other party. It is an agreement between two parties without previous obligations to one another that has been created and legally recognized by the court system.
Hypothetical example of a quasi contract situation: consider a food item (hamburger) that is delivered to the wrong address. The hamburger has already been paid for. If the individual does not correct the delivery man and instead keeps the hamburger, the court system could issue a quasi contract that would require the individual to pay back the amount of the hamburger to the party that purchased the hamburger. The contract is used to prevent any party from benefiting from the situation at the other party's expense.
Can you please tell me the name of two legal theories for which you want explianation/differentiate.
Thanks.