Remoteness & Quasi Contracts — KSLU Contract 1 Notes

Remoteness & Quasi Contracts

Remoteness (S.73 + Hadley v. Baxendale): the two limbs of S.73 map exactly onto Hadley — recoverable loss is that which is reasonably foreseeable at the time of contracting (refined in Victoria Laundry v. Newman, 1949); Madras Railway v. Govinda Rau denied special loss where the special purpose was not communicated. Quasi contracts (Ss.68–72) rest on unjust enrichment — obligations the law imposes though there is no actual agreement: necessaries supplied (S.68), payment by an interested person (S.69), benefit of a non-gratuitous act (S.70), finder of goods (S.71), and money paid by mistake or coercion (S.72).