<Li> A breach of contract </Li> <P> Notice that (1) - (5) are all causative events (see above). The law responds to each of them by imposing an obligation to pay compensatory damages . Restitution for wrongs is the subject which deals with the issue of when exactly the law also responds by imposing an obligation to make restitution . </P> <P> In Attorney General v Blake, an English court found itself faced with the following claim . The defendant had made a profit somewhere in the region of £ 60,000 as a direct result of breaching his contract with the claimant . The claimant was undoubtedly entitled to claim compensatory damages but had suffered little or no identifiable loss . It therefore decided to seek restitution for the wrong of breach of contract . The claimant won the case and the defendant was ordered to pay over his profits to the claimant . However, the court was careful to point out that the normal legal response to a breach of contract is to award compensation . An order to make restitution was said to be available only in exceptional circumstances . </P> <P> Cases of intentional torts or breaches of fiduciary duty often allow for claims of unjust enrichment, as well as cases of statutory torts and breaches of contract . A plaintiff can even have a claim in unjust enrichment when there is no other substantive claim . The Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC") entitles a buyer who defaults restitution of the buyer's deposit to the extent it exceeds reasonable liquidated damages or actual damages . If the contract does not have a liquidated damages clause, the UCC provides a statutory sum: 20% of the price or $500, whichever is less, and the buyer who defaulted is entitled to restitution of any excess . </P>

Money damages is one form of an equitable remedy