WWF (Jason Neyers, 2 Apr 2007)

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:	Jason Neyers
Date:	Mon, 2 Apr 2007 09:48:33 -0400
Re:	WWF

If they are contrasting compensatory with punitive then I would agree if not then not so much.

----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Mitchell
Date: Monday, April 2, 2007 9:35 am
Subject: [RDG]
The CA's decision in the WWF case has been published, holding not only that Wrotham Park damages are compensatory, but also that a Blake account of profits is 'a flexible response to the need to compensate the claimant for the wrong which has been done to him' [59] (Chadwick LJ).

<== 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! "

»
»
»
»
»

For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.