Friedman

*
. ,
, , .

. ,
, .
, '
. , '
,
. .
' , ,
, , , , .
,
,
.
' ,
: ,
".
, , . ,
,
.
761
z:\books\fridman\20071223\friedman09.doc
Restitution of Benefit Obtained Through the '

1980 ,Appropriation of Property or the Commission of a Wrong
,( : )Columbia Law Review
1.
2
' 5. 4 3, ' ,
,
, , 6.
,
Daniel Friedmann, Restitution of Benefit Obtained through the Appropriation of

: )Property or the Commission of a Wrong, 80 Colum L. Rev. 504 (1980)
, .(
( ' 601301 ' )1713
.( ", )
.
. 40
Jack Beatson, The Nature of Waiver of Tort, The Use and Abuse of Unjust
.Enrichment 206 (1991)
Hanoch Dagan, Unjust Enrichment A Study of Private Law and Public
.Values (1997)
Ernest J. Weinrib, Restitutionary Damages as Corrective Justice, 1 Theoretical
.Inq. L. 1 (2000)
Daniel Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Basis of Liability, Restitution-
2
3
4
5
6
Past, Present and Future 133 (Cornish, Nolan, OSullivan and Virgo eds., 1998); Daniel
Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Measure of Recovery, 79 Tex. L. Rev. 1879
(2001); Daniel Friedmann, The Protection of Entitlements via the Law of Restitution
.Expectancies and Privacy, 121 L. Q. R. 400 (2005)
762
PM 1:34 1/17/2008 z:\books\fridman\20071223\friedman09.doc
7
8.

' , ,
.
'
: '
, .
.
,
, .
"
" .
,
, ,
, , . , )
( ,
,
.
.
, , , ,
,
. '
, ,
.
" ,' ' " 20/82" )221 (1
)) (1988 : ;(" ," ' 3666/90" )45 (4
)) (1992 : ;( " ' ... 5768/94
," )) (1998) 447441 ,289 (4 : ;(..." ' 371/89
," . ." )) (1990) 309 (2 : .(
.
A.G v. Blake [1998] 1 All E.R.
)) 833 (C.A. : (Blake 1998 Smithkline Beecham plc v. Apotex Europe
)) Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 658 (C.A. : .(Smithkline
763
, , " "
) .(wrongful enrichment
" " ,
)
( . " "

" : " " " ,
.
" " ,
' .

:
; /
;
,
, ,
.
.
,
)( " " ) Benefit Obtained Through
9,(the Appropriation of Property .

. "
" , '
.
property"" ' .
" ".
' "" ,
. ," ,1' ;512511
," ,1' .459450 , ,
' . ,Weinrib" ,5' .3534
764
) (;
;
.
.1

' ,
. ,
10.
, , ,
11,
, 12.

,
: .
Stoljar 13von-cmmerer
10
11
12
13
' , ,
, .
,
, , ,
.
,...
" ,7" , ' " 8483/02" )) (2004) 314 (4 :
.( .
, '
. ,..." ,7' ) 447441

( . '
,Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Basis of Liability" .6

" " )
.(
, .
" , ' " () 5924/97
" ).(1999) 488 (4
," ,1' .508506
,Weinrib" .5
765
14. ,
:

. '

. ,
, ,
, ,
15.
" . ,
' " : ,
,
. : ,
, ) ("16.
.
.
, , ,
17. ' .
, ,
,
18. ,
14
15
16
17
18
,
" ,7' ,257252 ' "'
' : " ) 37 "(.
," ,1' .829809
," ,7' .276

) 268260"(.
," ,7
' " :259 ,
, " .
, ,
. , ,,
".
," ,7' ) 244242
( ,' ) 271261 ( ' ) 283281 (.
766

19. ,
20, , , 21.
' 22.
.
.
, ""
, .
" " ) (waiver of tort ,
.
' .
.
wrongs
23.
. ... "
''
'"24.
'
" "
25. '
.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
," ,1' .526513

," ,1' .482
" , 6574/99
' , " )) (2004) 313 (3 : .(
," ,1' .771769 , "
,7' ) 59 ( ' ) 7776 ( .
) 240225 "(.
" 20 ,18.21
,Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Basis of Liability" .6
,..." ,7' .464 ,
) " ,( 11 Restatement (Third) of
) Restitution " .(56
Richard A. Epstein, The Ubiquity of the Benefit Principle, 67 S. Cal.
L. Rev. 1369, 1371 (1994) (...the common law coach runs not on three substantive
).wheels, but on four
767

. . , ,
.
,

. ,
.
.
.
,
, 26. ,
,

.
'

27.
,
, ' ,

. ,
, .
,
) ( ,
.
.2
1
Restatement of Restitution ,1937 A person who has been :
26
27

).(2000
," ,1' .549538
Jack Beatson, Restitution and Contract: Non-Cumul?, 1 Theoretical Inq. L. 83
768
.unjustly enriched at the expense of another is required to make restitution to the other
, 28,
29 30.
1 ," 31.1979

.

, .
,
, .
,
,
32. ' . ,
.1 :; .2 ; .3
, .
, , " ",
:
restitution may be justified on the general principle that a person who obtains
though not necessarily tortiously a benefit at the expense of another through
appropriation of a property or quasi-property interest held by the other person is unjustly
enriched and should be liable to the other for any benefit attributable to the
33.appropriation
28
29
30
31
32
33
Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v. Paul, 162 C.L.R. 221 (1987); K. Mason & J. Carter
).Restitution Law in Australia 4-5 (1995
Deglman v.
,Guaranty Trust Co. of Canada [1954] 3 D.L.R. 785
30 . .White v. Central Trust Co. [1984] 7 D.L.R. (4th) 236, 245 P.
).Maddaugh & J. McCamus, The Law of Restitution 17-36 (2nd ed., 2004
Lipkin Gorman (a firm) v. Karpnale Ltd [1991] 2 A.C. 548 (H.L.); A. Burrows,
).Restitution Where Do We Go From Here?, 50 C.L.P. 95 (1997
, " ,7' .7978

) ;Hanoch Dagan, The Law and Ethics of Restitution 11-36 (2004
" " ,' .653
," ,1' .509
769
34, .
"
" , draws its :
strength from fundamental concepts of property that prohibit exploitation of anothers
right even if the other is unable or unwilling to exploit the right himself without his
35.consent
? ,
.
,
, ,
.
.
,
, ," " 36. , .
,

.
: ;
" "; )"
" " "(
37.
34
35
36
37
,' .505504
,' .509
John P. Dawson, Unjust Enrichment: A Comparative Analysis 26 (1951) (It is
).not a rule. It never can be a rule. It is at most a working hypothesis
.
.
:

)
(;
) (
) ( .
, .
)
( , .
770
38. ,

.

. 39
40.
.
.
.
) (41

42.
, , '
38
39
40
41
42
' .
. ," ,1'
.556' " "
, . ,
.
,
. ,

, . ," ,16' 203
.202
.
)( ,".1959
,
)' (6556 ," .1965
; ' 65.
.
.
,
.

.
. " "
""
, "" , , '
, . ," ,1' .508
771
.'
,
, .
) (wrongful conduct " "
, 43. ,
, ;
)
( .
,
,
, .
,
;
.
, .
III .'
,
.
,

.
, :
, "44.
.3
,
, ,
" "" , "" , " " .
,
43
44
,' .513 ," ,7' 330

.329 ," ,16' .268260
," ,1' .556 ,551
772
45.
, ,
. ' :,

.
" "
) Stoljar (von-cmmerer
)
( .
.
,
.
" " .
.
46
47.
, .

,
48. ,
,
.
45
46
47
48
' 4 5
" "
. ," ,1' .2827
," ,1' .510 ,509
,' .538533
. Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Measure of
,Recovery" .6
," ,1' ...while the approach is based on the ) 557
assumption that certain interests qualify as property, it does not itself provide a means
.( of determining whether a particular interest ought to be recognized as property
773
. " "
.1

" " ) 49,(wrongful enrichment
)( )( .
" " ) waiver
.(of tort ) (
.
, 50: ,
""
; 51 ,
, ; ,

52.
" : " .
:
" " . '
, , ,
49
50
51
52
restitution for
wrongs restitution for unjust enrichment ,Birks
; Peter Birks, An
) .Introduction to the Law of Restitution 9-27 (Rev. ed., 1989
,
) Restatement (first) of Restitution (1937 Benefits Tortiously
) Acquired.(Restatement of Restitution :
,Beatson" .3
. " , ' 304/70" ).(1971) 670 ,665 (1
. , ,
.
).United Australia Ltd. v. Barclays Bank Ltd. [1941] A.C. 1 (H.L.
,Birks" ,49' .346318
'
) anti-enrichment wrongs(
.
774
, " "
.

.
, .
,
.
, .
) (
.
' :
) (
53,
. :,

,
54. ,
) " "(
, 55. ,

.
53
54
55
" . 13 ' 131130 ,128,Restatement of Restitution

" ) 49
, ,
( . ' 129 Restatement of
Restitution
) , ,
. ,
,assumpsit (.
Friedmann, The Protection of Entitlements via the Law of
,Restitution Expectancies and Privacy" .6
Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Basis of
,Liability" .6
775
" " ,
56 "" ,
"" , ) right
57,(of publicity ""
58. 59,
' , , " ...
,60" 61" 62.... , ,
63.
. "
" .
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
," ,1 .15
. Restatement (Third) of
Restitution . Restatement of the Law (Third), Restitution and Unjust
.Enrichment (Tentative Draft No. 4, 2005) ch. 5, topic 1 introductory note, Sec. 40-44
, ,
Gains realized in violation of anothers legally protected rights must be given :
.up to the person whose rights have been violated , ,Sec. 39
, ,
.
Restatement '
. Restatement

) . " .( 24
," ) 10 (.
," ) 20
(.
.'
(1)413 ," 2006 "
" .
.
" , ' ... 290/80" )) (1983) 640639 ,633 (2:
.( ... " ," ' 8060/95
" )) (2000) 375374 ,357 (1 : .("
," ,7' ) 238236 ( ' ) 276274
(.
,..." ,7' ) 417414 (.
" , ' 588/87" )) (1991) 297 (5 : ;( '
" , ' 891/95" ) ;(1999) 769 (4" ' 1632/98
," )) (2001) 925 ,913 (3 (.
776
.
" " .
'
. ' :
,
. ? ?
,
.

. " ",
" "
)" " " "( .
"
" , " "
.
.2 " "
" "
: , "
" , , " " .
, , " : "
.
)(
.
" "
, .
)( 64, , ,
, )( 65,
64
65
' ; ,
" " , ' '
. ,Weinrib" .5
' , ," ,1" .271
777
, )( 66.
" "
, ,
,
67.

, , , .
. "
" '
.1 : ; .2
. ,
" ":
" " . :
.1
) (; .2
.
, .
, ' 68
.
,
.
.

.
66
67
68
" 104.
, , Peter Birks, Misnomer, Restitution Past,

)) Present and Future, 1, 4-9 (Cornish, Nolan, OSullivan and Virgo eds., 1998

, (.
) .I. Jackman, Restitution for Wrongs, 48 Cam. L.J. 302 (1989 ,Weinrib
" ,5' ) 3433
The fiduciarys duty of loyalty then becomes for purposes of this relationship
.an entitlement of the beneficiary
778
" " . .1 :
; .2
.

69. ) ....
(70...
) (71
.

, .
,
72. " "
, ' ,
)( .
" "
) (
) ( 73.
" " ,
,
" " ,
, .
" " :
, " "
) ( ; ,
" "
,
69
70
71
72
73
," ;16 ,..." ,7' .488449

" , ' ... 4437/99" )232 (2
) .(2000 ," ,16' .330303 ,281268
" ,(1994) ' 6126/92" ) (1997) 471 (4
) .Iconco v. Jensen Constr. Co., 622 F. 2d 1291 (8th Cir. 1980 ,
" ,16' .303282
,' .16477
,' .115107
779
.
.
" " )
(
" " )
(.

.
:
: 74LAC Minerals Ltd. v. Intl Corona Resources Ltd.
: Corona ,
. ,LAC , ,
. .
Corona LAC .
, ,Williams property .
Corona ,Williams property LAC
,
. LAC
) .(Confidence
Corona
)( )
(?
,
. ,
) 75
74
75
).61 D.L.R. (4th) 14 (1989

,
) McIntyre Sopinka ,
, Wilson La Forest
, ( .
,Lamer
) ,
( . ,
, ,
780
, , 77.(76
: " ....

) ( ,
)
( . :
' ,
, , ,
, ,
78.

:
) " " (?
)
" " (?
,
) " " (?
,
)
( , ,
, " " )
76
77
Williams property LAC .Corona

,LAC , , ,
,Corona ) (Lien .
" ' 2568/97
, " )) (2003) 632 (2 , ,'
,(703654 . "
" ) 202"(.

. Chase Manhattan Bank. NA v. Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd [1981] Ch.
195; Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v. Islington London Borough Council
[1996] AC 669, 714-715 (per Lord Browne-Wilkinson) (H.L); Graham Virgo, The
).Principles of the Law of Restitution 628-637 (1999
78
, , ," ,16' 324

.319
781
( .,

,
" " , 79,
80.
,
.
.
.
81, 82,
.
,
, ,
,
.
, :
1
"

"
79
80
81
82
2
"
"
3
"
"

.1.
," ,16' .319312 ,
.'

. ," ,1' .450446
," 2005 .
.
" ?
" ) 498"( .
Gareth Jones, Stripping a Criminal of the Profits of Crime, 1 Theoretical Inq. L. 59
).(2000
," ,1' .601599
782
. " "
.1
' "
" : .
, ,
) ( ,
) ( ) (
) (quasi-property ) (,
. , ,
"" ) (appropriation " "
" . " ) ,
( "
" 83. ) ( ,
, .
" " " " " "
,
" " ,
,
84.
" "
,
"" , "" 85.
,
83
84
85
," ,1' .531 ,' ,543542

) Vincent v. Lake Erie Tran., 124 N.W. 221 (Minn. 1910
,
.
,' .551532
' . ,' .557
783
86.
:
.
. '
"
" ) .(corrective justice )(correlativity
,
.
" " , ,
,
. 87 '
) ( )(
. , , '
,
, )
( , . '

. ,
)
( 88. , ,
, ' .
'
89,
90.
86
87
88
89
90
. '
,Friedmann, Restitution for Wrongs: The Measure of Recovery
" ,6 .
" ) ' 8468/99 ) (3.4.2001 , : .(
) ( )
' (; ,.
,Weinrib" ,5' .32 ,2418 ,
, , ' ,
. " .140
" .68
784
.
. '
,
) , "(
" 91. ' ,
" "
,
92.
.
.2 " "
.
"
" . ,
.

: , /
.
. ,
,
.
93, , , ,

91
92
93
,Dagan" ,4' .14

.
, .
,
.
,Dagan" ,32' .228224
,Dagan" ,4' .1614
785
. ,
94.
"
" . ,
, ) ( .
, " ",
, , ,
.
" "95.
,
,
96.
, ,
.
,

) ( .

, .
94
95
96
," ,16' .153142

Jeff Berryman, The Case for Restitutionary Damages Over Punitive Damages:
).Teaching the Wrongdoer that Tort Does Not Pay, 73 Can. Bar Rev. 320 (1994
," ,87 . "
,
,
, " . ,
.
"" , "" , .
Olwell v. Nye and Nissen, 173 P. 2d 652 (Wash. S.C.
)) 1946 .
, ,
. 600.
50 .
, .
900( . " " 2287/00
' ) .(5.12.2005 ,
786

.
)(
.
, , ,
, .

97,
98,
99.

, 100.

? .
.
.
,
97 " , ' 158/77" ) ;(1979) 281 (2" 21/80
, ' " ) ;(1981) 253 (3" , ' 692/86" )57 (1
) (1989 .
,
,
.
98 .
" , ' 289/78" ) ;(1978) 13 (1" ' 2686/99
,"" ) .(2001) 365 (5
" " ) , .(2008
99 " ," ' 2371/01" )(5
) (2003) 787 : .( '
100 .
) .Lake v. Bayliss [1974], 2 All E.R. 1114 (Ch."
, , .
" 7' .254249 ," ,1' .521520
, , ' "
) 63 .
.
(.
787
101. , "
" .
,
102.
. ,
103.
) ( .
" " .
/ . "
" ,
,/
. 104
. ,
, ,
.

.
.
.

.

,
.
101
102
103
104
)) Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L.L.C. 126 S. Ct. 1837 (2006

,
, (; ,Dagan" ,4' .8982

. " .142
)) Vincent v. Lake Erie Tran, 124 N.W. 221 (Minn. 1910 : .(Vincent
Vincent" Richard A. Epstein,
).Takings Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain 110 (1985

," ,1' .546544
788
. ,
. ,
. ,
,
105. ,
106.
, )
( , . ,
) (ex-post ,
)ex-
(ante .
107,

108.

. ,
, , ,
109.
105 Melvin A. Eisenberg, Actual and

Virtual Specific Performance, The Theory of Efficient Breach, and the Indifference
).Principle in Contract Law, 93 Cal. L. Rev. 975 (2005
106
107
108
109
?
, ,
...
" , ' 1632/98" ).(2001) 913 (3
. )
( ,
. " : ,
, " ) 91"( .
,
,
. " .142
,Blake 1998
, Janet Osullivan,
Reflections on the Rule of Restitutionary Damages to Protect Contractual Expectation,

).Unjustified Enrichment 327 (David Johnston & Reinhard Zimmerman eds., 2002
789
. ,
/ , , .
" " ,
, ,
. ,
.
,
.
,
/
/ ) .(110double responsibility at the margin

,
.

111.
.
3 . 100
" , .
2.7 90 " .
3 2.7 .
2.7 .
.
)
( 112. ,
110 Robert Cooter, Unity in Tort, Contract, and Property: The Model of Precaution,
).73 Cal. L. Rev. 1 (1985
111 ) " (105

,
.
112 )Ruxley Electronics And Construction Ltd v. Forsyth [1996] 1 A.C. 344 (H.L.
) : (Ruxley )
(.
790
113.
.

.
,
114. , .

) ,
( . ,

115. ,
,
,
113 , ,Ruxley
, 21,560" ,
, 2,500" .
.
: ) Lloyd (Keith
; ) Mustill Bridge ( ,
,
. ) (Jauncey
) (.
114 Hobhouse The loss is a reasonable :Blake
valuation of what the plaintiff ought to have had but did not get. It is not just the amount
(if any) by which his property has a lower market value than that it would have had if
))) the contract had been performed (A.G v. Blake [2001] 1 AC 268, 298 (H.L.:
.(Blake 2001 Griffiths Linden Gardens Trust Ltd
).v. Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd [1994] 1 AC 85, 97 (H.L.
115 , Mustill .Ruxley " . 113
791
116,
117.

. ...
118
.
,
.
? 119 ,
, ,
. .
, ... 120,
116 ,
.
, ,

.
117 ," ,1' .524522 Woolf Blake
1998 Justice surely demands an :
award of substantial damages in such a case, and the amount of expenditure which the
defendant has saved by the breach provides an appropriate measure of damages. This
could be achieved by presuming that the plaintiff has suffered a loss of an amount
corresponding to the amount by which he has been overcharged for the service actually
provided; and the presumption could be justified by invoking the notion of 'the
consumer surplus'. But it would surely be preferable, as well as simpler and more open,
;to award restitutionary damages ,Blake 1998" ,8' .846845
118 , ..." ;60

,"" .60
119 .
, ...

) ,'
648645 ( .
,
, .
) 168166"(.
120 ... :
, , ;
792
,
. , ,
.
121.
,
122.
.
, .
)
( , ,
) ( .

.
, .
,
123.
, . ,
,
.
121
. Christopher T. Wonnell, The
) .Abstract Character of Contract Law, 22 Conn. L. Rev. 437, 448-462 (1990
, , ,
,
.
122 . Strand Electric and
Engineering Co. v. Brisford Entertainments [1952] 1 All E.R. 796 (C.A.); Robert J.
Sharpe & S.M. Waddams, Damages for Lost Opportunity to Bargain, 2 Oxford J. of
) .Legal Studies 290 (1982 ," ,1' .432427
123" , ' 280/73" )) (1974) 597 (1 : (

..." : .Actus legis nemini facit iniuriam
, ;
. , ,
" ) ,' .(601 ,
.
" , ' 243/83" )113 (1
) ;(1985" ," " ' 732/80" )) (1984) 645 (2 :
793
,
.
. , ,
) " " ;(Damnum Absque Injuria
, " " ,
.
? , ,
) ( , ,
)
( . ,
)
( ,
) ( .

,
)
( .
124
.125
.
;
, ,
. ,

. ,

.
. ;
.(
, ,
.
,' .664662 ,660658
124 . ,
125" , ' " 541/89" ).(1991) 506 (2
794
,
.
,
.
,Smithkline126 2006
, , .
, :
) : (.
2002-2001 ) : (
) : (
.
,
.
, .
, , , ,
127.
,

. ,Lord Justice Jacob ,
128.
" " Smithkline
129
126
127
128
129
,Smithkline" .8

.
' 71 . , ,Lord Justice Jacob
, ," ,123
.

" " . ," ,1
' .642639
" " . ,
, ,
.
.
795
. " "
.
:
. ;
. ;
. .

" " 130.
, 131,
, , "" ,
, ) (
132.
"
" . ,
.
, 133.
.
Smithkline

. if A has
had the use of Bs property, he must account for the benefit he has had from that use its
.fruit , ' .
"" . Jacob
"" , ) a mere
(freedom to trade ) (business opportunity
130
131
132
133
," ,16' .9389

,
.
, ,
. ," ,16 .
, " "
.
796
"" 134. , ,
. ,
, .
, ,
.

, ,
. Smithkline

135.
,
.
, ,
, .
,
136.

,
.
137Hoffmann-La Roche
, .
134 ,Smithkline" ,8' 71 74.

135' 80 ,
, Jacob I cannot see that the deterrent is necessarily a bad thing.
A party who may have to recompense third parties significantly damaged by an interim
injunction, is likely to weigh carefully whether he really has a case which he is likely to
.win at trial, as opposed to one which raises no more than a serious issue to be tried
, ,
, ?
.
136 John Leubsdorf, Preliminary
).Injunctions: In Defense of the Merits, 76 Fordham L. Rev. 33 (2007
137
F. Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [1975] AC
] .295 [H.L. Smithkline

. ,Smithkline" ,8' 3635 .
797
.
, .
.

. ,
, .
, ,
?

138,
?
,
.
, " "
.
:

.1

)(
.2
.

.1
).( ..

.1
.
.2 .
.2
.
.3
).(Vincent

.
138 ,Lord Diplock

.
798
139, .
,
. " " ,
.
.
.
.
,
140
141.
, /
. ,
, ,
, )
( . 142,
143.
139
140
141
142
, ' .
,Dagan" .4 " :
" ) 650632 ,601"(.
" , ' " 44/76" )) (1976) 785 (3 :
( ) ( . " , ' 6339/97" )(1
) (1999) 199 (.
" ) ( ,' ' 1068/96 ) .(2001
.
,
)( .
) (
.
, )
( .
.
, , Boomer v.
) ;Atlantic Cement Co., 26 N.Y. 2d 219, 257 N.E, 2d 870 (1970
).Wrotham Park Estates v. Parkside Homes Ltd [1974] 1 W.L.R. 798 (Ch.
Wortham Park
, 5%
. ,
799
.3
"
"
.
144, , , 145.
) ) ,Jaggard v. Sawyer [1995] 1 W.L.R 269 (C.A.

, , ,Blake 2001 " 114' .(283
) Wortham Park
(
. )) Horsford v. Bird [2006] UKPC 3 (P.C.
,
(; ]Lunn Poly Ltd v. Liverpool & Lancashire Properties Ltd [2006
)) EWCA Civ 430 (C.A.
( .
, ,
.Blake 2001 ,
Blake 2001
, WWF World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund) v.
)) World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc [2007] EWCA Civ 286 (C.A.:
.(WWF
143 ' 48 ] [ ," ,1968 "
,
,
;

" . ,
" .140
' 96 ,
. " ' 700/88
," ) ;(1991) 720 (3" ) ' 1769/04 , .(13.7.06
144 Gareth Jones, The Recovery of Benefits
Gained from a Breach of Contract, 99 L. Q. Rev. 443 (1983); Allen Farnsworth, Your
Loss or My Gain? The Dilemma of the Disgorgement Principle in Breach of Contract,
94 Yale L.J. 1339 (1985); Peter Birks, Profits of Breach of Contract, 109 L. Q. Rev.
518 (1993); Hanoch Dagan, Restitutionary Damages for Breach of Contract: An
).Exercise in Private Law Theory, 1 Theoretical Inq. L. 115 (2000
145 ,
.
800

146.

; 147 148.

, , ,
. ,
, .
,
. ,
:
) ;(149
)
;(150 )
.(151
,
? :
.

146
147
148
149
150
151
, , ,
, .

. " ",
,
" " .
," 7' 237 ,' .276279
, " ,7' .7877
' ; ," ,1' .493478
" 97.
" 105.
," ,1' ;522521 ," ,1' .485
:
,
, )
( ) ' )11( ) (,
") 1970 : ((.
801
.
,
.
.
,
.
, ,
.
/ .
.
,
152. ,
.
,
.
, ,
, .
. ""
) ( ,
.
)
( ,
"" ) ,
, .
,
(.
,
? : ,
) (; ,
,
. ,
, : ,
152 ,Dagan" ,32' .277272
802
; ,
,
153.

:
Blake .
; " " .
,

. , , ,
.
,
154. ,
.
. ,
. ,
, , )

( 155. ,
,
. ,
, ,
.
153 " .112

154 " .147
155 :
, 100 .95
,
, .
100
.
?
?
?
803
156,
.
11 ) (,

157.
158.

.
.Blake
,George Blake ,
1961 42 . 1966
Blake , )?( .
1989 Blake ,
150 " .
Blake ,
. ,
159.
156
157
158
159
, ,
.
, ,
) ( ,
' )84( ) ( ,") 1971 ' )76(
) ( ," (1999 ' 11
. , ' " .99
.

) " ' .... ' 815/80
,"" )" :(1982) 226 ,225 (4
. , "( .
" .165
,Dagan" ,32' ) 277272 , ,
,
(.
)) Snepp v. U.S., 444 U.S. 507 (1980 :
(Snepp )
( .
804

.Blake ,
, 160,
.
,

161. ,Woolf ,
" : " ) (Skimped Performance
.
, , 162.
Woolf .
If the court is unable to award restitutionary damages for breach of contract, :
then the law of contract is seriously defective. It means that in many situations the
plaintiff is deprived of any effective remedy for breach of contract, because of a failure to
.attach a value to the plaintiff's legitimate interest in having the contract duly performed
,
.
Blake .
163.
.
, ,
160
161
162
163

) ( .
Blake
...
compensatory damages are an inadequate remedy if :
;regard is paid to the objects which the plaintiff sought to achieve by the contract
,Blake 1998" ,8' .846
,Osullivan" .109
Blake ) ,(20001991
Blake . 26
2006 . ,
' 6 .
5,000 Blake" . App. No. 68890/01, Blake
).v. United Kingdom [2006] All E.R. (D) 126 (Sep) (Approved judgment
805
,Blake . ,
.
Blake
1944
. ,
Blake . ,Nicholls
, ,
.
. ,
,
:
, , ,
.
. Nicholls The law :
recognises that a party to a contract may have an interest in performance which is not
readily measurable in terms of money. On breach the innocent party suffers a loss. He
fails to obtain the benefit promised by the other party to the contract. To him the loss
may be as important as financially measurable loss, or more so The primary response
of the law to this type of case is to ensure, if possible, that the contract is performed in
164.accordance with its terms
, ,
, ,
.
;165
164 ,Blake 2001" ,114' .282

165 , ,
, .

) ex-ante ( .

, , .
: ,

; ,
. ,
806

, .
. ,
.
166.
, Blake
.
Hobhouse 167,
, Blake
, .
,
168.
, ,
Blake , ,
, , )
( . " 154.
166 , ,
,Blake
)
,Wrotham park" .(142
,
. ,
) , Wrotham park , (;
, ) (
. ,
. ,WWF" ,142
).Experience Hendrix LLC v. PPX Enterprises Inc. [2003] 1 All E.R. (Comm) 830 (C.A.
167
, ,
.
168 .Snepp
If the agent publishes unreviewed material in violation of his :
fiduciary and contractual obligation, the trust remedy simply requires him to disgorge
the benefits of his faithlessness. Since the remedy is swift and sure, it is tailored to deter
;those who would place sensitive information at risk ,Snepp" ,159'
.515
807
169. ,
" " , ,
, , ' :
170.

: ,
) //
//(; ,
. , :
;
.
,
,
.

" " , .
'

169 Nicholls .Blake 2001

Blake I am
reinforced in this view by noting that most of the profits from the book derive indirectly
from the extremely serious and damaging breaches of the same undertaking committed
by Blake in the 1950s. As already mentioned, but for his notoriety as an infamous spy
his autobiography would not have commanded royalties of the magnitude Jonathan Cape
;agreed to pay ,Blake 2001" ,114' .287 ,
,Hobhouse
, .The just :
response visualised in the present case is, however it is formulated, that Blake should be
punished and deprived of any fruits of conduct connected with his former criminal and
reprehensible conduct. The Crown have made no secret of this. It is not a commercial
claim in support of any commercial interest. It is a claim relating to past criminal
, ;conduct' .295
170 ," ,1' .601594
808
.
, .
" "
:
" " .
;
" " .
;
" " .
;
.
.

" " .
:
.1
;
/ .2
;
.3 ,
,
.
.
, ,
.
.

.
" " .
'

.
809

Friedman

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Friedman

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

*

Restitution of Benefit Obtained Through the '

Daniel Friedmann, Restitution of Benefit Obtained through the Appropriation of

," ,1' .526513

Jack Beatson, Restitution and Contract: Non-Cumul?, 1 Theoretical Inq. L. 83

  , " ,7' .7978

,' .513  ," ,7' 330

" . 13 ' 131130 ,128,Restatement of Restitution

, , Peter Birks, Misnomer, Restitution Past,

 ," ;16 ,..." ,7' .488449

).61 D.L.R. (4th) 14 (1989

Williams property LAC .Corona 

 , ,  ," ,16' 324

," ,1' .531  ,' ,543542

,Dagan" ,4' .14

 ," ,16' .153142    

)) Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L.L.C. 126 S. Ct. 1837 (2006 

105  Melvin A. Eisenberg, Actual and

Reflections on the Rule of Restitutionary Damages to Protect Contractual Expectation,

111  ) " (105 

118 , ..." ;60   

123" , ' 280/73" )) (1974) 597 (1 : (

 ," ,16' .9389

134  ,Smithkline" ,8' 71 74.

] .295 [H.L.    Smithkline

138 ,Lord Diplock

) ) ,Jaggard v. Sawyer [1995] 1 W.L.R 269 (C.A.

153  " .112

164 ,Blake 2001" ,114' .282

169   Nicholls .Blake 2001 

170  ," ,1' .601594

You might also like

, " ,7' .7978

,' .513 ," ,7' 330

" . 13 ' 131130 ,128,Restatement of Restitution

," ;16 ,..." ,7' .488449

Williams property LAC .Corona

, , ," ,16' 324

," ,1' .531 ,' ,543542

," ,16' .153142

)) Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L.L.C. 126 S. Ct. 1837 (2006

105 Melvin A. Eisenberg, Actual and

111 ) " (105

118 , ..." ;60

123" , ' 280/73" )) (1974) 597 (1 : (

," ,16' .9389

134 ,Smithkline" ,8' 71 74.

] .295 [H.L. Smithkline

) ) ,Jaggard v. Sawyer [1995] 1 W.L.R 269 (C.A.

153 " .112

164 ,Blake 2001" ,114' .282

169 Nicholls .Blake 2001

170 ," ,1' .601594