Anaction for money had and received to the plaintiff's use is the name for a common law claim derived from the form of action known as indebitatus assumpsit. The action enabled one person to recover money which has been received by another: for example, where a plaintiff paid money to the defendant while labouring under a mistake of fact or where there was a total failure of consideration. The action was a personal action only available in respect of money, rather than other benefits. Where the benefit received by the defendant was services or goods, the appropriate action was a quantum meruit or a quantum valebant, respectively.
The action for money had and received formed a part of the law of quasi-contract. Although the forms of action were abolished in the mid-19th century, reference continues to be made to the action in modern pleading.[1] The terminology of "quasi-contract" has been replaced by the more modern terminology of unjust enrichment in most common law jurisdictions.
|
Ignorance sources
| |
|---|---|
Holiday v Sigil (1826) 2 C&P 176 | |
Banque Belge pour L'Etranger v Hambrouck [1921] 1 KB 321 | |
Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265 | |
Carl-Zeiss Stiftung v Herbert Smith & Co (No 2) [1969] 2 Ch 276 | |
Re Montagu's Settlement Trusts [1987] Ch 264 | |
Belmont Finance Corp v Williams Ltd (No 2) [1980] 1 All ER 393 | |
Re Diplock [1951] AC 251 | |
Criterion Properties plc v Stratford LLC [2004] UKHL 28 | |
