Moses v. Macferlan [1760]
2 Burr 1005 · King's Bench · England and Wales
Issue
Whether an action for money had and received can be maintained to recover money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant under a mistake of fact.
Held
Yes, the action lies. The defendant is liable to repay the money.
Exam use
Summary
Whether an action for money had and received can be maintained to recover money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant under a mistake of fact.
Facts
Issue
Whether an action for money had and received can be maintained to recover money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant under a mistake of fact.
Held
Yes, the action lies. The defendant is liable to repay the money.
Ratio Decidendi
The law implies a promise to repay money paid under a mistake of fact, based on the Roman law principle of quasi-contract that no one should be unjustly enriched at another's expense.
Reasoning
Essay-Ready Explanation Generator
Version 1 of 4
Reference to Moses v. Macferlan (2 Burr 1005) strengthens a Roman Law answer because the case reflects the principle that The law implies a promise to repay money paid under a mistake of fact, based on the Roman law principle of quasi-contract that no one should be unjustly enriched at another's expense. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Whether an action for money had and received can be maintained to recover money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant under a mistake of fact. The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.
Underlying Concepts
- roman-law
- Roman Law
- Quasi-Contract (Roman Law Influence)
- case authority
- exam application
Significance
Related Cases
No related cases listed.
Exam Tips
Revision Checklist
- Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
- State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
- Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
- Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.