ABSTRACT
This paper examines the concept of quasi-contractual obligations, tracing their historical evolution and current application across diverse legal systems, including Roman law, Common law, French law, and Islamic jurisprudence. It identifies the persistent lack of a unified understanding of quasi-contracts, which complicates their application and limits international legal harmonisation. A central focus is the principle of unjust enrichment, often cited as the basis for these obligations. However, the study highlights that unjust enrichment alone may not fully justify the legal frameworks governing quasi-contractual obligations. Instead, it proposes a broader perspective that incorporates natural justice principles to address fairness and prevent imbalances between parties The paper also explores the concept of ‘beneficial acts’, a classification used in jurisdictions like Oman, as a potential foundation for addressing quasi-contractual obligations. By analysing comparative examples, the study underscores the importance of harmonising legal principles to ensure consistency and fairness in resolving such obligations. The paper concludes with actionable recommendations, such as developing model laws and leveraging international conventions, to create a cohesive legal framework for quasi-contractual obligations globally.
€
Hafiz Gaffar and Saif Al Mamari, From Roman law to Sharia: comparative perspectives on the evolution of quasi-contracts in western and Islamic jurisdictions, Griffith Law Review. Published online: 5 April 2025.
Leave a Reply