The case of Sinclair v. Brougham., supra, shows that, although an action for money had and received will not lie to recover money obtained as the consideration of an ultra-vires borrowing, yet if the money can be identified an action will lie for its return. The goods of the plaintiffs which the defendants have on hand being readily identified, must be returned to the plaintiffs as they are their property.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.