The establishment of a quasi-contract is independent of the intention of the parties to conclude a contract or not. Quasi-contracts describe a party`s obligation to another when it is in possession of the assets of the original party. These parties do not necessarily need to have concluded a prior agreement between them. The agreement is imposed by law by a judge as a remedy if person A owes something to person B because he indirectly or inadvertently comes into possession of person A`s property. The contract becomes enforceable if person B decides to keep the item in question without paying for it. A quasi-contract may allow less recovery than a tacit contract. An implied contract will construct the entire agreement as the parties had intended so that the party seeking to create an implied contract can be entitled to the expected profits, as well as the costs of labor and materials. A quasi-treaty is created only to the extent necessary to prevent unjust enrichment. As one court put it, contracts implied by law are „only remedies granted by the court to enforce reasonable or moral obligations despite the lack of approval by the accused party“ (Gray v.
Rankin, 721 F. Supp 115 [S.D. Miss. 1989]). The amount of recovery for an implied contract is usually limited to labour and material costs, as it would be unfair to force a person who did not intend to enter into a contract to pay profits. For example, a quasi-contract may be imposed by law if a person, accidentally or due to circumstances, comes into possession of someone else`s property and decides to keep it without paying for it. Since the parties did not have an express contract or even an implied contract, the quasi-contract is constructed by a judge to remedy an unfair situation, regardless of the intention of the parties. The purpose of a quasi-contract is for the court to remedy a situation in which one party has exploited another party with unfair intent. A quasi-contract is a legally imposed obligation to prevent a person from benefiting from further or unjustified enrichment.
As a rule, quasi-contracts are concluded before the courts and the remedy in case of abusive situation is reimbursement. This means that two individuals can conclude a legally binding contract, provided that the rules of formation of the contract are respected and that the contract does not violate public order or the law. The quasi-contract is created strictly to the extent that it is necessary to avoid a situation of unjust enrichment, while a tacit contract can lead to various obligations that one person may demand from the other person. The form of action known as indebitatus assumpsit has become various sub-forms known as common monetary accounts. The most important of these for the further development of quasi-contractual law were: (i) the criminal actions had been and had received them for the use of the claimant; (ii) actions for payment of a sum of money for the use of the defendant; (iii) quantum emeruit; and (iv) quantum valebate.  A quasi-contract is entered into by a judge in a court […].