What defines an implied-in-fact contract?

An implied-in-fact contract arises from the actions or circumstances of the parties involved, rather than from a written or spoken agreement. The correct choice highlights a key characteristic of such contracts: when one party has benefited from a service or benefit that the other party has provided, the law typically recognizes that the benefiting party has a legal obligation to compensate the other party. This ensures fairness and justice by recognizing the expectation of payment or compensation for the provided benefit, even in the absence of an explicit agreement.

This concept is common in scenarios where services are rendered or goods are provided, and one party has taken advantage of these services without a formal agreement. In legal terms, the party who provided the benefit can claim compensation based on the understanding that it is right to receive payment for what they have done, even if no formal contract was established.

Considering the other options, a situation with an explicit agreement (the first choice) does not apply to implied-in-fact contracts, which rely on inferred intent rather than clear terms. The second choice regarding no contract being intended contradicts the definition of an implied-in-fact contract, as some level of intention to create a contractual obligation is inherently assumed. Lastly, the last choice about both parties fully performing their obligations doesn't