{"title":"赔偿过错","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":"{\"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}","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}
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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
