A partner in a firm fraudulently contracted in the names of the partnership to sell goods to the plaintiff. He received the purchase price from the plaintiff and then did not delivery the goods.
Held: The plaintiff buyer could recover the purchase price from the fraud as money had and received.
Lord Ellenborough CJ said: ‘It is said that an action for money had and received is not maintainable in this case. But an action for money had and received is maintainable whenever the money of one man has, without consideration, got into the pocket of another. Here the money of the plaintiffs has got into the pocket of the defendant; and the question is whether this has been without any consideration. The consideration was the supposed right of the defendant to dispose of the goods as partnership property, which was the inducement to the plaintiffs to give this bill, under which they have been obliged to pay the money. The defendant had no such right; therefore the absence of any consideration entitles the plaintiffs to maintain this action, and still more so where the money has got into the defendant’s pocket through the medium of a fraud.’
Judges:
Lord Ellenborough CJ
Citations:
(1816) 4 M and S 475
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Lipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd HL 6-Jun-1991
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.259417