The courts try to organize the restitution of an accused according to the offence committed. For example, an accused convicted of incitement to prostitution may be tasked with working in the public for a local shelter for abused women as a form of reparation. The law of reimbursement is the law of recovery based on profits. It must be compared to the law of compensation, to the law of recovery based on losses. When a court orders reimbursement, it orders the defendant to transfer its profits to the applicant. When a court orders compensation, it orders the defendant to pay the claimant for his loss. This type of damages restores the benefit granted to the non-injuring party. Simply put, the claimant obtains the value of what was awarded to the defendant under a contract. There are two general limitations to recovery, namely that a complete infringement is necessary and that damages are limited to the price of the contract if the compensation damage exceeds it. Whether or not an applicant can demand the annulment of an injustice depends to a large extent on the injustice at issue. For example, in English law, reimbursement for breach of fiduciary duty is widespread, but reimbursement for infringement is quite exceptional. The bad thing could be one of the following types: a group of young offenders makes restitution by repainting a wall covered with graffiti.
AP/WIDE WORLD PHOTOS As we noted above, the most common basis is restitution for unjustified enrichment. There are two elements: some form of payment or return from the applicant to the defendant, in combination with an unfair factor that undermines the applicant`s intent. It is important to take both of them at once. Assuming there was enrichment, it must be unfair. The reasons for restitution are not closed, but unfair factors come to some minds. it is not sufficient for the applicant to rely solely on abuse; he must prove that his claim falls within an identifiable category (and which already exists normally). The most important categories are: Imagine that A commits an injustice against B and B complains about that injustice. A will certainly be liable for damages to B. If B seeks compensation, the judgment is measured on the basis of the damage suffered by B as a result of A`s unlawful act. However, in certain circumstances, B is open to claiming reimbursement rather than compensation. It is in his interest to do so when the profit that A has made as a result of his unlawful act is greater than the damage suffered by B. The Orthodox view suggests that there is only one principle on which the law of restitution depends, namely the principle of unjustified enrichment.
  However, the view that restitution, like other legal reactions, may be provoked by one of the many events originally, is spreading more and more. . . .