Recognition of a Disgorgement of Profits for Breach of Contract in the United States of America Law: Lessons for South African Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25159/2522-3062/10789Keywords:
contractual damages, law of contract, disgorgement remedy, gain-based remedy, Actio quanti minorisAbstract
A disgorgement remedy for breach of contract seeks to take away profits acquired through breach of contract. Since contractual damages only seek to compensate the plaintiff for the patrimonial loss suffered due to breach of contract, the law of contract does not generally provide for the disgorgement of profits generated through breach of contract. However, there have been circumstances where the party in breach generates profits as a result of breach contract and the other party does not suffer patrimonial loss. As a result, the plaintiff in these circumstances would not have a remedy against the defendant because he cannot prove patrimonial loss caused by the breach. However, this position is changing. The recognition of disgorgement of profits acquired through breach of contract appears to be gaining acceptance around the world. The United States of America has recognised a disgorgement remedy to take away profits acquired through breach of contract to ensure that the defendant does not gain as a result of his breach of contract. A similar remedy has not yet gained acceptance in South Africa. This study seeks to assess how the United States of America has recognised a disgorgement remedy and draw some lessons for South African law in recognising a similar remedy.
Metrics
References
American Law Institute, Restatement (Third) of Agency (American Law Institute St Paul 2006).
American Law Institute, Restatement (Second) of Contracts (American Law Institute Minnesota 1981).
American Law Institute, Restatement (Second) of Trusts (American Law Institute Washington DC 1959).
American Law Institute, Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment (American Law Institute St Paul Minn: American Law Institute Publishers 2011).
American Law, Institute Restatement on Restitution (American Law Institute Minnesota 1937).
Calamari JD, Calamari and Perillo on Contracts (West Group 2003).
Cooter R and Freedman BJ, ‘The Fiduciary Relationship: It’s Economic Character and Legal Consequences’ (1991) 66 New York University Law Review.
Craswell R, ‘Against Fuller and Perdue’ (2000) 67 The University of Chicago Law Review. <https://doi.org/10.2307/1600327> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1600327
Dagan H, ‘The Distributive Foundation of Corrective Justice’ (1999) Michigan Law Review. <https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.182575> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.182575
Dana D and Koniak SP, ‘Bargaining in the Shadow of Democracy’ (1999) University of Pennsylvania Law Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/3312797 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3312797
Daube D, Forms of Roman Legislation (Greenwood Press 1979).
Dobbs DB, Handbook of the Law of Remedies: Damages - Equity – Restitution (West Academic Publishing 2017).
Edelman J, Varuhas J and Colton S (eds), McGregor on Damages (Sweet and Maxwell 2019).
Eisenberg MA, ‘Actual and Virtual Specific Performance, the Theory of Efficient Breach, and the Indifference Principle in Contract Law’ (2005) California Law Review.
Eisenberg MA, ‘The Disgorgement Interest in Contract Law’ (2006–2007) Michigan Law Review.
Farnsworth EA, ‘Your Loss or My Gain? The Dilemma of the Disgorgement Principle in Breach of Contract’ (1985) Yale Law Journal <https://doi.org/10.2307/796132> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/796132
Farnsworth EA, Farnsworth on Contract (Aspen Law and Business 1998).
Farnsworth EA, ‘Legal Remedies for Breach of Contract’ (1970) Columbia Law Review 1145-1216 <https://doi.org/10.2307/1121184> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1121184
Friedman D, ‘Restitution of Benefits Obtained Through the Appropriation of Property or Commission of a Wrong’ (1980) Columbia Law Review. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1122248
Friedman LM, Contract Law in America: A Social and Economic Case Study (Quid Pro Books 2011) <https://doi.org/10.2307/1122248>
Fuller LL and Perdue WL, ‘The Reliance Interest in Contract Damages’ (1936) Yale Law Journal <https://doi.org/10.2307/791632> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/791632
Grotius H and Fruin R, Inleidinge Tot De Hollandsche Rechts-geleerdheid, Beschreven Bij Hugo De Groot, Part 2 (Nabu Press 2012).
Holmes OW Jnr, ‘The Path of the Law’ (1997) Harvard Law Review <https://doi.org/10.2307/1342108> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1342108
Hondius E and Janssen A (eds), Disgorgement of Profits: Gain-Based Remedies throughout the World (Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18759-4
<https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18759-4>
Kull A ‘Disgorgement for Breach, the “Restitution Interest” and the Restatement of Contracts’ (2001) Texas Law Review.
Lomio JP, Spang-Hanssen H and Wilson G, Legal Research Methods in a Modern World (Djoef Publishing 2011).
Maddaugh JD and McCamas JD, The Law of Restitution (Thomson Reuters 2018).
McCamus JD, ‘Disgorgement for Breach of Contract: A Comparative Perspective’ (2003) Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review.
McCormick CT, Handbook on the Law of Damages (West Publishing Company. 1935).
Perillo J, T Murrey; AL Corbin and JE Murrey, Corbin on Contracts (Matthew Bender, 2004)
Roberts CL ‘A Commonwealth of Perspective on Restitutionary Disgorgement for Breach of Contract’ (2008) Washington and Lee Law Review <https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1232258> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1232258
Schwartz A, ‘The Case for Specific Performance’ (1979) 89 Yale Law Journal <https://doi.org/10.2307/795838> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/795838
Seanego KA, ‘A Gain-based Remedy for Breach of Contract in English Law: Some Lessons for South African Law’ (2020) 5 Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa <https://doi.org/10.25159/2522-3062/7742> DOI: https://doi.org/10.25159/2522-3062/7742
The Digest of Justinian (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998).
Washington GT, ‘Damages in Contract at Common law’ (1932) Law Quarterly Review.
Winterton D, Money Awards in Contract Law (Hart Publishing 2015).
Yorio E, ‘In Defence of Money Damages for Breach of Contract’ 1982 Columbia Law Review <https://doi.org/10.2307/1122267> DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1122267
Legislation
United States Constitution.
Case Law
Allsopp Sand and Gravel, Inc. v Lincoln Sand and Gravel Co., 171 Ill. App.3d 532, 121Ill. Dec. 878, 525 N.E2d 1185 (1988).
Allsopp Sand and Gravel, Inc. v Lincoln Sand & Gravel Co., 171 Ill. App.3d 532, 121Ill. Dec. 878, 525 N.E2d 1185 (1988).
Anthony’s Pier Four v HBC Assocs. 583 N.E.2.d 806 (Mass. 1991).
Ashby v White 92 Eng.Rep 126 (Q.B 1703).
Attorney-General v Blake [2001] 1 AC 268 (HL).
Banda v Van der Spuy 2013 4 SA 77 (SCA).
Barkhuizen v Napier 2007 (5) SA 323 (CC).
Beadica 231 CC and Others v Trustees for the time being of the Oregon Trust and Others [2020] ZACC 13.
Bush v Canfield 2 Conn. 485 (1818).
California Federal Bank v United States, 43 Fed. Cl. 445 (1999).
Chronister Oil Co v Unocal Ref. and Mktg., 34 F.3d 462 (7th Cir. 1994).
City of New Orleans v Fireman’s Charitable Association 9 So 486 (1891 SC l Lou).
Colby v Street, 179 NW 599 (Minn. 1920).
Coppola Enterprises Inc v Alfone 531 So 2d 334 (Fla. 1988).
Defeyter v Riley, 671 P.2d 995 (Colo. Ct. App. 1983).
Didcott v White 32 NPD 269.
Du Plessis v Semmelink [1976] 3 All SA 60 (T).
EarthInfo v Hydrosphere Inc 900 P.2d 113, 118, 119 (Colo. 1995).
Federal State Bank v United State, 43 Fed. Cl. 390 (1999).
Freund v Washington Square Press 34 N.Y.2d 379, 357 N.Y.S2d 857, 314 1974.
Fry v Reynolds (1828-1 849) 2 Menz 161.
Grosvenor Motors (Border) Ltd v Visser [1971] 3 All SA 398 (E).
Grummel v Hollenstein 367 P.2d (Arizona 1962).
Hawkins v McGee 146 A. 641 (N.H. 1929).
Irvine and Co v Berg (1879) 9 Buch 183.
Keech v Sandford 25 Eng. Rep. 223 (1726).
Kemp v Gannett, 365 N.E.2d 1112 (1977).
Landmark Land Co. v United States, 46 Fed. Cl. 261, 273 (2000).
Laurin v DeCarolis Construction Co. 363 NE 2d 675 (Mass. 1977).
Lieberman v Templar Motors Co 236 N.Y. 139, 140 N.E. 222, 29 ALR 1089 (1923). <https://doi.org/10.3950/jibiinkoka1897.29.1_139> DOI: https://doi.org/10.3950/jibiinkoka1897.29.1_139
Liu v Securities E exchange Commission No. 18–1501. Argued March 3, 2020—Decided June 22, 2020.
Mercer v Lemmens 40 Cal. Rptr. 803, 807 (1964).
Middleton v Crowder 563 So 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990).
Mobile Oil Explorations and Producing SouthEast Inc v United States 120 S Ct 2423 (2000 SCUS).
Montres Rolex SA v Kleynhans 1985 (1) SA 55 (C) 68.
Murphy v Lifschitz 47 N.Y.S.2d 439, 441 (1944).
Newman v Cary 466 So. 2d 774 (La. Ct App. 1985).
Ohlsson's Cape Breweries Ltd v Levison 1905 TH 330.
Olwell v Nye and Nissen Co. 173 P.2d 652 (Washington 1946).
Orwell v Mortoft Y.B. Mich. 20 Henry 7, f. 8, pl. 18 (1505).
Osteen v Johnson 473 P.2d 1984 (Colo. App. 1970).
Phelps v O’Malley 511 N.E.2d 974 (iii, App. Ct. 1987).
Quality Excelsior Coal Co v Reeves 177 S.W.2d 728, 732 (Ark. 1944).
Reed v Wadsworth 553 P.2d 1024, 1036 (Wyo. 1976).
Robinson v Harman (1848) Exch. 850, 154 RE 363.
Rothko’s Estate 43 N.Y2d 305, 401 N.Y.S2d 449, 372 N.E.2d 291 (1977).
Seaside Cmty.Dev. Corp. v Edwards 573 So 2d 142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991).
Snepp v United States 444 US 507 (1980) 509.
Structural Dynamics Research Corp v Engineering Mechanics Research Corp 401 F Supp 1102 (ED Mich 1975).
Taylor v Kelly 56 NC (3 Jones Eq.) 240, 245 (1857).
Timko v Useful Homes Corp. 168 A. 824 (N.J Ch. 1933).
Triangle Waist Co. v Todd 119 N.E 85 (N.Y 1918).
Truter v Dunn 1905 ORC 115.
United States Naval Institute v Chartered Communications 936 F.2d 692, 696 (Cir. 1991).
Winstar Corporation v United States 518 U.S. 839 (1996).
Winstar Corporation v United States 64 F.3d 1531(Fed. Cir. 1995).
Wrotham Park Estate Co v Parkside Homes Ltd [1974] 1 WLR 798 Ch.
Wyatt v School Dist. No. 104, 417 P.2. (Mont. 1966).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
© Published by the Department of Public, Constitutional and International Law, University of South Africa and Unisa Press.
Accepted 2023-03-20
Published 2023-06-15
