83,049
edits
Quasi-contract: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "An american attempt to describe the law of restitution. Eventually, they have up and just called it restitution, but it does show how they were struggling to understand how th...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
An american attempt to describe the law of restitution. Eventually, they have up and just called it restitution, but it does show how they were struggling to understand how this “duck-billed platypus” of the common law fitted in to the grand scheme of things. That struggle goes on, with unfortunate decisions such as {{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}}. | An american attempt to describe the law of restitution. Eventually, they have up and just called it restitution, but it does show how they were struggling to understand how this “duck-billed platypus” of the common law fitted in to the grand scheme of things. That struggle goes on, with unfortunate decisions such as {{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}}. | ||
{{quote|''{{restitution capsule}}''}} | |||
Restitution isn’t an action in [[Breach of contract|contract]], and it isn’t one in [[tort]]. It is precisely what you get where there ''isn’t a [[contract]], and there ''hasn’t been'' a [[tort]]. | |||
But the Americans do like their quasi-legal concepts. [[Quasi-agency]] is another. | |||
{{Sa}} | {{Sa}} | ||
| Line 10: | Line 12: | ||
*{{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}}. | *{{casenote|Citigroup|Brigade Capital Management}}. | ||
*[[Quasi-agency]] | *[[Quasi-agency]] | ||
{{ref}} | |||