Final answer:
If a court finds that a benefit was provided with a reasonable expectation of payment and the defendant would be unjustly enriched without paying, the court may impose a remedy known as quantum meruit to ensure fair compensation.
Step-by-step explanation:
If there was no contract but a court finds that the plaintiff gave a benefit to the defendant, the plaintiff reasonably expected to be paid for the benefit and the defendant knew this, and the defendant would be unjustly enriched if he did not pay, the court may impose a remedy known as quantum meruit. This legal principle is used to provide compensation for services rendered in situations where no formal contract exists, but where work was performed with the reasonable expectation of payment. Quantum meruit is part of equitable remedies that ensure fairness and prevent unjust enrichment. While traditionally related to the field of contracts, it also has relevance in restitution claims and in quasi-contract scenarios, where the enforcement of a contract-like obligation is necessary to prevent a party from unjustly benefiting from another's efforts without compensating them. It is important to note however, that for quantum meruit to apply, the service must not have been provided gratuitously; the recipient must have known or had reason to know that the provider expected compensation.