Restitution for Wrongs

Q2 Social Sciences Singapore Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2007-01-10 DOI:10.5040/9781472561350.ch-011
W. Wan
{"title":"Restitution for Wrongs","authors":"W. Wan","doi":"10.5040/9781472561350.ch-011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the theoretical justifications in awarding restitutionary damages for civil wrongs and argues that restitutionary damages should be available as of right so long as appropriate rules of causation and remoteness to the different kinds of wrongs are developed as well. In addition the scope of proprietary remedies should be rationalised and should only be explicable on institutional constructive trust principles. Only exceptionally should the remedial constructive trust be invoked.","PeriodicalId":38330,"journal":{"name":"Singapore Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"1998 1","pages":"299-330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5040/9781472561350.ch-011","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Singapore Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472561350.ch-011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

This article examines the theoretical justifications in awarding restitutionary damages for civil wrongs and argues that restitutionary damages should be available as of right so long as appropriate rules of causation and remoteness to the different kinds of wrongs are developed as well. In addition the scope of proprietary remedies should be rationalised and should only be explicable on institutional constructive trust principles. Only exceptionally should the remedial constructive trust be invoked.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
赔偿过错
本文考察了对民事过错给予恢复性损害赔偿的理论依据,并认为只要制定了适当的因果关系规则和不同类型的错误之间的距离,恢复性损害赔偿就应该是一种权利。此外,专有补救措施的范围应合理化,并应仅根据体制上的建设性信任原则加以解释。只有在例外情况下,才能援引补救性建设性信托。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Concept of Money in the 4th Industrial Revolution—A Legal and Economic Analysis Banking and Regulatory Responses to Fintech Revisited—Building the Sustainable Financial Service ‘Ecosystems’ of Tomorrow NUS Law in the Noughties: Becoming ‘Asia’s Global Law School’ Contract as assumption II: Formation, performance and enforcement [Book Review] Between Judicial Oligarchy and Parliamentary Supremacy: Understanding the Court's Dilemma in Constitutional Judicial Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1