Of course it's just a tree.  What does it look like ?
RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives
  
 
 

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

 
<== Previous message       Back to index        Next message ==>
Sender:
Lionel Smith
Date:
Mon, 29 Apr 2002 09:41:26 -0400
Re:
Restitution damages for breach of contract

 

The SCC released a decision on Thursday last which considered measures of damages in breach of contract. If I read it correctly it admits in dicta, contrary to previous SCC dicta, the possibility gain-based damages for breach of contract, under the label "restitution damages", although I find the relevant passage (paras 30-33, 59-61) kind of confusing. One might think that the judge did not distinguish restitution from disgorgement (if one were minded to use that kind of terminology). One might even argue that this is a case which shows the confusion which can arise when one uses "restitution" to refer both to giving back and to giving up.

The case at this level is about simple vs compound interest.

Bank of America Canada v. Mutual Trust Co., available on line at

http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/rec/html/clarica.en.html

 

Lionel


<== Previous message       Back to index        Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "


     
Webspace provided by UCC   »
»
»
»
»
For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.
only search restitution site

 
 Contact the webmaster !