Under the material benefit rule, why is there a modern trend toward allowing enforcement of a promise to pay for an unrequested service?

• A. Because the service provides a material benefit and it would be unfair to allow the promisor to exploit the beneficiary.
• B. Because consideration is always required.
• C. Because the service is always enforceable without promise.
• D. Because the contract is void.

Answer: (A)

The key idea is preventing unjust enrichment when someone provides a service that benefits another person who didn’t ask for it. In modern practice, courts are more willing to enforce a promise to pay for an unrequested service if the service yields a material benefit to the recipient and it would be unfair to let them keep that benefit without paying. The service has real value to the promisor, and allowing them to retain the benefit without compensation would be inequitable, so the promise to pay can be enforced even without traditional consideration. This isn’t a blanket rule that every unrequested service is enforceable or that consideration is never needed, nor does it render the contract void; it’s about fairness and preventing unjust enrichment when a material benefit has been conferred.