Quid pro quo

Quid pro quo means something for something: a thing given in exchange for another. It is the idea of reciprocity, and in law it is used in several distinct settings.

In contract it explains consideration. Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 treats the act, abstinence or promise done or made at the desire of the promisor as consideration for the promise, so each party gives something in return for what he receives. Section 25 makes an agreement without consideration void, subject to the exceptions it lists. Indian law does not require the exchange to be equal: under Explanation 2 to Section 25, inadequacy of consideration does not by itself void an agreement.

In constitutional and tax law it marks the line between a fee and a tax. In Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar (1954) the Supreme Court explained that a tax is a compulsory exaction for public purposes without reference to any special benefit to the payer, whereas a fee is charged for a special service rendered to the payer and involves an element of quid pro quo, with a correlation between the levy and the cost of the service. Later decisions have accepted that this correlation need only be broad and general, not exact.

The phrase is also used for a form of sexual harassment at the workplace, where employment benefits are offered or threatened in return for sexual favours; Section 3(2) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013 lists an implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment, or threat of detrimental treatment, in employment among the circumstances that may amount to sexual harassment. Examiners usually ask only for the meaning, often in a match the following question with other maxims.