The Disgorgement Interest in Contract Law

Restatement Second of Contracts provided that contract law serves to protect one or more of three interests: the expectation interest, the reliance interest, and the restitution interest. There is, however a fourth interest that contract law should and does protect: the disgorgement interest, which is the promisee\u27s interest in requiring the promisor to disgorge a gain that was made possible by the promisor\u27s breach, but did not consist of a benefit conferred on the promisor by the promisee. It is not clear why Restatement Second excluded the disgorgement interest. Perhaps the drafters believed that this position was compelled by positive law. That proposition, however, would have been doubtful even when Restatement Second was published, and it is clearly wrong today: some appellate cases, and a handful of trial court cases, have denied protection to the disgorgement interest, but a dozen or so American appellate cases, as well as cases decided by the highest courts of several other common law jurisdictions, have afforded such protection. Alternatively, the drafters of Restatement Second may have believed that the disgorgement interest should not be protected as a normative matter That proposition also cannot be supported. On the contrary, there are strong efficiency reasons, as well as moral reasons, for protecting the disgorgement interest, because in certain categories of cases, protection of that interest in contract law is necessary to provide efficient incentives to the promisor, to effectuate contracts, or to prevent unjust enrichment. Of course, the disgorgement interest should not be protected in all cases in which a promise is legally enforceable, any more than the reliance interest, the restitution interest, or for that matter the expectation interest are protected in all cases. Rather, as in the case of those interests, the disgorgement interest should be protected when appropriate, and in certain categories of cases protection of the disgorgement interest is always appropriate