Abstract
Disgorgement of profits, as a remedy, is not alien to Greek private law, but the relevant legal framework seems to be rather fragmented. Disgorgement damages are confronted with skepticism, since according to the (still) prevailing opinion in Greece the aim of damages is primarily compensatory. Pragmatic approaches, though, led to the enactment of special provisions in the late 1980s and early 1990s for the infringement of certain immaterial goods, following the German model of the so-called ‘triple damage calculation’ (dreifache Schadensberechnung). The protection of intellectual property rights has been further enhanced through substantive and procedural rules, enacted for the transposition of Directive 2004/48/EC into Greek law. Disgorgement of profits may be attained, at least in theory, through other private law institutions as well, namely agency without authorization (negotiorum gestio) and unjust enrichment, but in practice few claims are brought on these legal bases. When there is a contractual relation between the parties, the creditor may claim the gain that arises out of the impossibility of performance as a ‘substitute’, while special provisions regulate the disgorgement of profits in case of breach of fiduciary duties. Finally, further private law instruments, such as collective claims, may lead to results functionally comparable to disgorgement damages, even if this is not their main aim. The paper concludes that from a de lege ferenda perspective the adoption of disgorgement damages as a general remedy, following the pattern of Art. 6:104 of the new Dutch Civil Code, would serve better the practical needs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
See Jegon v. Vivian (1870–1871) Law Reports. Ch. 6, 742 et seq., at 761.
- 2.
See e.g. Arts. 65, 65A and 66 of Law 2121/1993 on civil, administrative and criminal sanctions for infringements of copyrights; Arts. 1 (in combination with Art. 914 GrCC), 25 and 44 of Law 3959/2011 on civil liability as well as on administrative and criminal sanctions in case of violation of the law on free competition through forming cartels.
- 3.
This issue has been examined in Greece especially within the framework of private enforcement of competition law. For an overview of the relevant discussions see Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 1 et seq., especially no. 37–50.
- 4.
In Greek ‘μη γνήσια διοίκηση αλλοτρίων’ (Art. 739 GrCC), which is the equivalent to the German term ‘unechte Geschäftsführung ohne Auftrag’ (§ 687 [2] BGB).
- 5.
See Stathopoulos (2004), § 8 no. 7; Filios (2011a), § 168 B 1; Georgiades (2011), § 5 no. 4; Georgiades (1999), § 10 no. 3; Kerameus et al. (2000), 31 et seq. at 33; Valtoudis (2009), 203 et seq., at 204; Roussos (2013), 81 et seq. at 81. Cf. Kornilakis (2012), § 81 no. 2; Doris (2007), 673 et seq., at 679.
- 6.
Pecuniary losses are assessed on the basis of the ‘theory of difference’, as formulated by Mommsen (1855). On the application of this theory in Greece see, among many others, Stathopoulos (2004), § 8 no. 47 et seq.; Spyridakis (2004), no. 63.3; Georgiades (2011), § 5 no. 10; Georgiades (1999), § 10 no. 6. From case law see the following decisions of the Greek Supreme Court (Areios Pagos – hereinafter: AP): 416/2012, available at the databank, Intrasoft-Nomos; 1054/2011, Intrasoft-Nomos, 1432/2009, ChrID 2010, 440.
- 7.
Damage is in principle assessed on the basis of the ‘concrete calculation method’. Deviations to this rule are foreseen by special provisions. On this issue see, among many others, Stathopoulos (2004), § 8 no. 7-8 and 93 et seq.; Georgiades (2011), § 5 no. 72; Georgiades (1999), § 5 no. 5 and § 10 no. 3.
- 8.
- 9.
See Stathopoulos (2004), § 8 no. 13; Filios (2011a), § 168 B 1; Georgiades (2011), § 5 no. 7; Panagopoulos (2000), 195 et seq., at 225 and 228; Valtoudis (2009), 205. Cf. however Kornilakis (2012), § 81 no. 4; Doris (2007), 679; Spyridakis (2004), no. 62.3; Zervogianni (2006), 9 stressing the importance of both aims. Cf. also Marinos (2009a), 2029 et seq. at 2035 and 2042 et seq., referring to the aim of compensation for infringement of immaterial goods in particular.
- 10.
Art. 65 Law 2121/1993 provides an example of such a provision. See in more detail infra section “Before the Directive 2004/48/EC on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights”. On the possibility of the legislator to deviate from the compensatory aim of damages and proceed to the enactment of such provisions see especially Stathopoulos (2004), § 9 no. 9; Doris (2007), 678. Contra Papanikolaou (2007), 289, especially at 290 et seq. and Roussos (2013), 82 who claim that the legislator should provide special justification when enacting such provisions.
- 11.
See the landmark decision AP (full bench) 17/1999, published in DEE 2000, 181. This decision regarded the enforcement in Greece of a punitive damages award of the court of Houston, Texas. Areios Pagos ruled that punitive damages are not per se contrary to the Greek ordre public, unless they are excessive. This decision has been in principle well-received in the literature. See Nikolaidis (2000), 319 et seq., especially at 321 and 332; Panagopoulos (2000), especially 231-232; Doris (2007), 679; Stathopoulos (2010b), 609 et seq., especially at 621; Themeli (2011), 1399 et seq., especially at 1416; cf. Dellios (2013), no. 75. Contra Valtoudis (2009), 205; cf. Kerameus et al (2000), especially at 35. Cf. also Roussos (2013), 82.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
See Art. 298 GrCC which defines lost profits as the profits that would be expected with a high degree of probability in the usual course of events, taking into account the special circumstances, and particularly the preparatory measures taken.
- 15.
- 16.
See AP 940/1995, NoV 1997, 1109; decision 4661/2004 of the Multi member Court of First Instance of Athens, NoV 2005, 114. On this issue see Synodinou (2007), 295; Fountedaki (2012), 417 et seq. Cf. Karakostas (2011), 335, who confronts this approach of case law with skepticism and Karagiannis (2007), 83 et seq., especially at 86 who heavily criticizes it.
- 17.
On the function of such damages, especially in cases of infringement of the right of publicity by the mass media, see infra section “Monetary ‘Satisfaction’ for Non-pecuniary Loss for Infringement of the Right of Publicity”.
- 18.
See Art. 17 para. 2 of Law 1733/1987.
- 19.
See Art. 17 para. 2 of Presidential Decree 45/1991.
- 20.
See Art. 28 of Presidential Decree 259/1997.
- 21.
In Art. 65 para. 2.
- 22.
Art. 65 para. 3.
- 23.
This debate refers mainly to the provisions of Art. 17 para. 2 of Law 1733/1987 on patents. According to the prevailing opinion the options provided in this article constitute alternative ways of assessment of damages. See Rokas (2011), § 12 no. 8; Antonopoulos (2005), no. 1013–1015; Panou (1999), 1109 et seq. who refers to three ways of assessing damages. See also decisions 478/2008 of the Piraeus Court of Appeals, DEE 2008, 1371; 454/1990 of the Athens Court of Appeals, EllDni 1991, 198; Multi member Court of First Instance of Athens 1808/2010 Intrasoft-Nomos. Contra (rightly, in my opinion) Valtoudis (2009), 206–207. Cf. also Karagounidis (2011), 100. The wording of Art. 65 of Law 2121/1993 on copyrights is clearer, as it states that the wrongdoer’s enrichment or his profits may be claimed instead of compensation. It is therefore accepted that the law provides special claims of unjust enrichment and false agency without authorization respectively. See Stamatoudi (2011), 21 et seq. at 21-22; Garoufalia (2003), 102 et seq.; Kallinikou (2008), no. 269; Kotsiris (2010), no. 419. Cf. also Valtoudis (2009), especially 211, according to whom both claims should be rather based on unjust enrichment.
- 24.
The most important issue where the practical significance persists pertains to the prescription of the rightholder’s claims. The claim for damages in tort is prescribed in 5 years (Art. 937 GrCC), the claim for unjust enrichment in 20 years (Art. 249 GrCC), while, according to the prevailing opinion claims deriving from false agency without authorization are prescribed in 20 years. See Sakketas (1952–1987), Art. 739 GrCC no. 6; Papanikolaou (1980), Art. 739 GrCC no. 11; Georgiades (2007), § 36 no. 70; Tasikas (2010), Art. 739 GrCC no. 13. Contra Kallimopoulos (1978), 206, according to whom the claim prescribes in 5 years. Differences may also arise as to the extent of the profits which the plaintiff can claim. On this point see and infra sections “False Agency Without Authorization” and “Unjust Enrichment”.
- 25.
See Liakopoulos (1974), 596 et seq.; Panou (2000), 1254 et seq.; Antonopoulos (2005), no. 778; Marinos (2009b), no. 819 who are all in favor of the application of Art. 17 para. 2 in all cases of violations of immaterial goods. See also Marinos (2007), 577 et seq.; Karagiannis (2007) 123 et seq., especially 140 et seq. pleading for the application by analogy of the provisions of Law 2121/1993 on copyrights in cases referring to the right of publicity. Contra Fountedaki (2012), 424.
- 26.
See decisions Piraeus Court of Appeals 478/2008, DEE 2008, 1371; Athens Court of Appeals 454/1990, EllDni 1991, 198; Multi member Court of First Instance of Athens 1808/2010, Intrasoft-Nomos. Cf. however decision 1726/2013 of the Single member Court of First Instance of Athens, available at Isokratis databank, which seems to accept the application (by analogy) of the provisions of Law 1733/1987 for the protection of trademarks as well.
- 27.
See Art. 53 of Law 3966/2011 which amended Law 1733/1987 on patents. This reform has been criticized as hasty, since it introduced in Law 1733/1987 a new article (namely Art. 17Δ), which repeats the wording of Art. 13 of the Directive, without nevertheless repealing the already existing provisions of the same law (Art. 17 para. 2), which contains very similar rules. On this point see Karagounidis, in Association of Greek Commercialists (2011) 97–98.
- 28.
See Art. 17 para. 3 of Presidential Decree 45/1991 on semiconductor products and Art. 28 para. 2 of Presidential Decree on industrial designs, that were also amended by Art. 53 of Law 3966/2011.
- 29.
See Art. 150 of Law 4072/2012 and especially para. 7 that reads: “When assessing damages the court takes into consideration, among other factors, the negative financial consequences and the loss of profits of the rightholder, as well as the profits derived by the person who infringed the trademark” and para. 8 according to which “If the wrongdoer did not act culpably, the rightholder has a claim for the amount by which the wrongdoer has profited from the exploitation of the trademark without his consent, or for the gains that the wrongdoer derived from this exploitation”.
- 30.
See Art. 65 of Law 2121/1993.
- 31.
See Marinos (2009b), 2048; Marinos (2010), 601 et seq., at 603; Karagounidis (2011), 102. Nevertheless, both claim that a restrictive interpretation of Art. 65 of Law 2121/1993 is necessary, in the sense that only if the wrongdoer acted with gross negligence or intent should compensation amount to double the license fees. Cf. also Kallinikou (2008), no. 269; Valtoudis (2009), 205, however, expresses his reservations as to the compatibility of Art. 65 of Law 2121/1993 with the Directive.
- 32.
See Marinos (2009b), at 2029.
- 33.
See Art. 6 of Directive 2004/48/EC.
- 34.
See Art. 8 of Directive 2004/48/EC.
- 35.
Art. 2 para. 3 of Law 3524/1997 introduced a new article in Law 2121/1993, namely Art. 63A.
- 36.
Art. 53 of Law 3966/2011 introduced a new article in Law 1733/1987 (namely Art. 17 Α), which applies also in industrial designs and semiconductor products (see supra note 28). In addition, the new law on trademarks (Law 4072/2012) includes these rules in Art. 151.
- 37.
On this issue see in detail Apostolopoulos (2008), 179 et seq.
- 38.
See Art. 730 of the GrCC.
- 39.
According to the rather prevailing opinion, false agency without authorization exists when the gestor acted with intension (no matter if this intention had been immediate or eventual). See Papanikolaou (1980), Art. 739 GrCC no. 4; Oikonomopoulou (2008), Art. 739 GrCC no. 3; Tasikas (2010), Art. 739 GrCC no. 3. Contra Kallimopoulos (1978), 61, who restricts the application of this provision only in cases of immediate intention.
- 40.
On the tort liability of the gestor in case of false agency without authorization see Kallimopoulos (1978), 81-82; Sakketas (1952–1987), Art. 739 GrCC no. 1; Papanikolaou (1980), Art. 739 GrCC no. 12; Oikonomopoulou (2008), Art. 739 GrCC no. 3; Tasikas (2010), Art. 739 GrCC no. 9. See also decision 3488/2004 of the Multi member Court of First Instance of Piraeus, ChrID 2005, 30.
- 41.
See Arts. 739, 734 and 719 GrCC. According to the prevailing opinion the gestor has to return to the principal all profits, even if these are partially due to the former’s special capabilities. See Filios (2011b), § 101; Georgiades (2007), § 37 no. 66-67; Tasikas (2010), Art. 739 GrCC no. 7. Contra Kallimopoulos (1978), 189 et seq.; Papanikolaou (1980), Art. 739 GrCC no. 10; Karagiannis (2007), 102, who claim that the profit should be distributed between the gestor and the principal, depending on the circumstances. Cf. also Karakostas (2011), 333, who claims that the provisions on false agency without authorization are stricter for the gestor compared to the provisions of unjust enrichment and torts.
- 42.
See Kallimopoulos (1978), 52; Papanikolaou (1980), Art. 739 GrCC no. 3; Georgiades (2007), § 37 no. 63; Tasikas (2010), Art. 739 GrCC no. 1; Karakostas (2011), 332. Cf. also Christodoulou (2007), 180 et seq. at 196, with specific reference to the application of Art. 739 in case of infringement in immaterial goods.
- 43.
If the gestor did not knowingly manage the affairs of another, the provisions on false agency without authorization do not apply and he is therefore only liable on unjust enrichment, or probably also on torts. See Art. 740 GrCC as well as Papanikolaou (1980), Art. 740 GrCC no. 4; Tasikas (2010), Art. 740 GrCC no. 4-5.
- 44.
See also Art. 740 GrCC, as well as supra note 39. On the comparison of the provisions of Art. 739 GrCC with Art. 65 of Law 2121/1993 on copyrights see in detail Garoufalia (2003), 102 et seq.
- 45.
- 46.
- 47.
- 48.
- 49.
See Art. 909 GrCC.
- 50.
- 51.
See among many others AP 1326/2011 Intrasoft-Nomos; AP 1468/2010, EfAD 2011, 100; AP 493/2010, ChrID 2011, 338.
- 52.
- 53.
See Art. 336 GrCC. See also Art. 363 GrCC on the initial impossibility of performance, i.e. the impossibility which existed already at the time of the conclusion of the contract. See also Art. 380 GrCC on reciprocal contracts.
- 54.
See Art. 338 GrCC.
- 55.
See Arts. 335 and 362 GrCC on the subsequent and on the initial impossibility of performance respectively. Cf. Art. 382 GrCC on reciprocal contracts.
- 56.
- 57.
- 58.
On the function of the claim for the substitute see in detail Kornilakis (2009), 428 et seq., and especially at 430, referring the significance of this claim as a means for the disgorgement of the debtor’s profits.
- 59.
- 60.
See Stathopoulos (2004), § 19 no. 46; Georgiades (2011), § 20 no. 30; Spyridakis (2004), no. 120.5; Koumanis (2010), Art. 338 GrCC no. 9, according to whom in such cases the creditor shall receive only part of the substitute, similarly as in cases of unjust enrichment (see supra section “Unjust Enrichment”). Contra Filios (2011b), § 125 B, according to whom the creditor is entitled to the whole substitute. Cf. also Kornilakis (2009), 427-428, who concludes that the claim for the substitute differs functionally from the claim of unjust enrichment.
- 61.
See Art. 23 para. 2 of Law 2190/1920 on companies limited by shares and Art. 20 para. 3 of Law 3190/1955 on limited liability companies. This is equivalent to the German ‘Eintrittsrecht’, provided in Art. 113 HGB. In is worth noting that in case of limited liability company, the company has a claim for the profits only if the director entered into a transaction in the name of a third party. If he did so in his own name, he is only liable to pay damages to the company. See also Marinos (2009a), 2044 noting the deterrence effect of these provisions.
- 62.
See Arts. 59 and 932 GrCC.
- 63.
- 64.
In Greece there exist no tables regarding damages for non pecuniary losses, and thus the amounts granted to the victim may diverge significantly from one case to the other.
- 65.
See, among many others, AP 109/2012; Intrasoft-Nomos; AP 284/2012, Intrasoft-Nomos; AP 1007/2011, ChrID 2012, 256; AP 654/2009, Intrasoft-Nomos. For a detailed analysis of these criteria see Paterakis (2001), 314 et seq., especially 320-321 and 340.
- 66.
See Art. 4 para. 10 of the only Art. of Law 2328/1995 on infringements by Radio and TV. See also para. 2 of the only Art. of Law 1178/1981, as amended by para. 1 of the only Art. of Law 2243/1994 referring to minimum compensation of the non pecuniary loss of the victim in case of libel by the press. It has been debated in case law whether these minimums amounts may be reduced by the courts, if in a specific case, considering all the relevant facts, the prescribed amount of minimum compensation is inconsistent with the constitutional principle of proportionality (see Art. 25 para. 1 of the Greek Constitution). Decision 6/2009 of the full bench of Areios Pagos, published in Arm 2009, 1162, decided in the negative, on the ground that the principle of proportionality is primarily addressed to the legislator and not to the judge. This decision has been (rightly, in my opinion) heavily criticised. See among many others, Stathopoulos (2010a), 833 et seq.; Fountedaki (2012), 379 et seq.
- 67.
See also Karagiannis (2007), 120 fn. 250.
- 68.
See supra section “False Agency Without Authorization”.
- 69.
Cf. however Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 84 who discusses the aims of private enforcement of competition law to conclude that they are primarily compensatory.
- 70.
Art. 10 para. 15 of Law 2251/1994.
- 71.
Art. 10 para. 16 of Law 2251/1994.
- 72.
Art. 10 para. 16 (β) of Law 2251/1994.
- 73.
Art. 10 para. 22 of Law 2251/1994.
- 74.
Art. 10 para. 24 of Law 2251/1994.
- 75.
See among many others AP 652/2010, DEE 2010, 943; AP 430/2005, DEE 2005, 460; AP 1219/2001, DEE 2001, 2001.
- 76.
See Nikolaidis (2000), 326; Panagopoulos (2000), 226; Doris (2007), 677; Georgiades (2005), 145 et seq., at 156; Dellios (2013), no. 74; Apalagaki (2008), Art. 10 of Law 2251/1994 no. 70; Stathopoulos (2010b), 616; Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 176. See also Papanikolaou (2007), especially at 292 with heavy criticism of this provision. On case law see supra note 75; contra Karakostas (2008), especially no. 1013-1018, who insists on the compensatory aim of this claim, claiming further (at no. 1026) that deterrence is just a positive side effect. Nevertheless Karakostas seems in the meanwhile to have adopted a more moderate approach. See Karakostas (2011), 381 fn. 1147, accepting the punitive aim of such damages.
- 77.
Art. 10 para. 22 of Law 2251/1994.
- 78.
Ibid.
- 79.
See in detail Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 1 et seq., especially 37 et seq.
- 80.
See Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 84-87.
- 81.
See para. 11 of the preamble of the proposal. On such provisions in the White Paper and previous drafts of the Directive see Papadelli (2010), 662 et seq.
- 82.
See Law 3959/2011.
- 83.
See Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 177-178. Cf. Karakostas (2008), no. 978 who also claims that collective claims of consumer associations are not restricted in cases where the provisions of consumer law are violated, but they can be filed in case of violations of other legal provisions as well, provided that the relation between the parties is a consumer-supplier relation. Cf. also Athens Court of Appeals 147/2004, NoV 2005, 289 and Koumanis (2005), 502 et seq.
- 84.
See in more detail Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 179 et seq., referring especially to the very short prescription time for this claim.
- 85.
See Athanassiou (2013), § 24 no. 184.
- 86.
See especially Stathopoulos (2010b), 621.
Bibliography
Antonopoulos, V. 2005. Industrial property [in Greek], 2nd ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Apalagaki, C. 2008. Article 10 of Law 2251/1994. In Consumer protection law [in Greek], ed. Alexandridou E., Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki.
Apostolopoulos, C. 2008. Directive 2004/48/ΕC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights and Law 3524/2007 on its transposition in Greek Law [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 179 et seq.
Athanassiou, L. 2013. In Law of free competition [in Greek], ed. Tzouganatos, D.N. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki.
Besanko, D., and R.R. Braeutigam. 2010. Microeconomics, 4th ed. Hoboken: Wiley.
Christodoulou, K. 2007. Notes on the general theory of immaterial goods [in Greek]. Dikaio Meson Mazikis Enimerosis: 180 et seq.
Cooter, R., and T. Ulen. 2012. Law and economics, 6th ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Dellios, G. 2013. General terms and conditions [in Greek], 2nd ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Doris, P. 2007. Civil liability issues from a comparative-historical and legal-comparative perspective [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 673 et seq.
Filios, P. 2011a. Law of obligations. General part [in Greek], 6th ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Filios, P. 2011b. Law of obligations. Special part. Volume I [in Greek], 9th ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Fountedaki, K. 2012. Natural person and personality in the civil code [in Greek]. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Garoufalia, O. 2003. Application of false agency without authorization in copyright law [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 102 et seq.
Gazis, A. 1952–1987. Article 338. In Commentary to the civil code (ErmAK) [in Greek]. Athens.
Georgiades, A. 1999. Law of obligations. General part [in Greek]. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Georgiades, G. 2005. Punitive damages in Europe and the USA: Doctrinal differences and practical convergence. Revue Héllénique de Droit International: 145 et seq.
Georgiades, A. 2007. Law of obligations. Special part. Volume II [in Greek]. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Georgiades, A. 2011. Law of obligations. General part [in Greek], 6th ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Hall, R.E., and M. Lieberman. 2009. Microeconomics. Principles and applications, 5th ed. Mason: South Western Educational Publishing.
Kallimopoulos, G. 1978. False agency without authorization [in Greek]. Athens: Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Kallinikou, D. 2008. Copyrights and related rights [in Greek], 3rd ed. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Karagiannis, K. 2007. The compensation claim for unlawful use of a person’s image [in Greek]. Athens/Komotini: Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Karagounidis, A. 2011. Damages in intellectual property law [in Greek]. In The competitive activity and its protection, ed. Association of Greek Commercialists. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki. pp. 93 et seq.
Karakostas, I. 2005. Die Entschädigung in Geld für Nichtvermögensschäden und die Anerkennung eines Angehörigenschmerzensgeldes im griechischen Recht. Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (ZEuP): 107 et seq.
Karakostas, I. 2006. Right for the commercial exploitation of elements of the personality and archival materials [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 193 et seq.
Karakostas, I. 2008. Consumer protection [in Greek]. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki.
Karakostas, I. 2011. Law of personality [in Greek]. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki.
Kerameus, K.D., S. Vrellis, and A. Grammatikaki-Alexiou. 2000. Declaring enforceable in Greece a foreign punitive damages award [in Greek]. Koinodikion: 31 et seq.
Kornilakis, A. 2009. The breach of a reciprocal contract [in Greek]. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Kornilakis, P. 2012. Special part of the law of obligations, volume I [in Greek], 2nd ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Kotsiris, L. 2010. Copyright law [in Greek], 5th ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Koumanis, S. 2005. Consumer protection through collective action according to Law 2251/1994 for unlawful processing of personal data (Law 2472/1997) [in Greek]. Armenopoulos: 502 et seq.
Koumanis, S. 2010. Article 338. In Brief commentary of the civil code (SEAK), volume I [in Greek], ed. A. Georgiades. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Liakopoulos, A. 1974. Ways to assess damage in intellectual property law [in Greek]. Epitheorisi Emporikou Dikaiou: 596 et seq.
Marinos, M.T. 2007. Commercialization of personality and copyright law – Application by analogy of law 2121/1993 in case of exploitation of the personality right [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 577 et seq.
Marinos, M.T. 2009a. Compensation claims for infringement of intellectual property rights according to directive 2004/48/EC – Towards a special, ‘deterrence oriented’ tort law [in Greek]. Nomiko Vima: 2029 et seq.
Marinos, M.T. 2009b. Unfair competition [in Greek], 2nd ed. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Marinos, M.T. 2010. Issues on damages due for infringement of intellectual property rights according to directive 2004/48/EC – A contribution to the interpretation of art. 13 of the directive and at the same time of art. 65 para 2 of law 2121/1993 [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 601 et seq.
Mommsen, F. 1855. Zur Lehre vom dem Interesse. Braunschweig: Schwetschke.
Nikolaidis, G. 2000. Contravention or no contravention of punitive damages to the Greek public order [in Greek]. Kritiki Epitheorisi Nomikis Theorias kai Praxis: 319 et seq.
Oikonomopoulou, V. 2008. Article 739. In The civil code (Commentary), volume 5 [in Greek], ed. I. Karakostas. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki.
Panagopoulos, K. 2000. Punitive damages and Greek public order [in Greek]. Kritiki Epitheorisi Nomikis Theorias kai Praxis: 195 et seq.
Panou, G. 1999. Award of an amount corresponding to the license fees as damages for the infringement of an immaterial good [in Greek]. Dikaio Epichiriseon kai Etairion: 1109 et seq.
Panou, G. 2000. The claim to recover the concrete loss from the infringement of an immaterial good and the claim to grant to the rightholder the profit of the wrongdoer [in Greek]. Elliniki Dikaiosyni: 1254 et seq.
Papadelli, A. 2010. Compensation claims for infringement of EU antitrust legislation. From the White Paper to the informal proposal of a directive [in Greek]. Dikaio Epichiriseon kai Etairion: 662 et seq.
Papanikolaou, P. 1980. Articles 739 and 740. In The civil code – Commentary volume III [in Greek], ed. A. Georgiades and M. Stathopoulos. Athens: P.N. Sakkoulas.
Papanikolaou, P. 2007. Monetary ‘satisfaction’ awarded in collective actions as means of fighting against abusive general terms and conditions [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 289 et seq.
Paterakis, S. 2001. Monetary ‘satisfaction’ for non pecuniary loss [in Greek], 2nd ed. Athens/Komotini: Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Rokas, N. 2011. Industrial property [in Greek], 2nd ed. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki.
Roussos, K. 2013. The tort liability system in Greek and European law [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaio: 81 et seq.
Sakketas, I. 1952–1987. Article 739. In Commentary to the civil code (ErmAK). Athens.
Spyridakis, I. 2004. Law of obligations. General part [in Greek]. Athens/Komotini: Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Stamatoudi, I. 2011. Compensation claim for wrongful infringement of copyrights [in Greek]. Dikaio Meson Mazikis Enimerosis: 21 et seq.
Stathopoulos, M. 2004. General part of the law of obligations [in Greek], 4th ed. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Stathopoulos, M. 2010a. Proportionality, reasonable compensation and revision of the judgment [in Greek]. Nomiko Vima: 833 et seq.
Stathopoulos, M. 2010b. Punitive damages, compensatory aim and public order [in Greek]. Elliniki Dikaiosyni: 609 et seq.
Synodinou, T.E. 2007. The image in the law [in Greek]. Athens/Thessaloniki: Sakkoulas.
Tasikas, A. 2010. Articles 739 and 740. In Brief commentary of the civil code (SEAK), volume I [in Greek], ed. A. Georgiades. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Themeli, C. 2011. On the penalty clause in Greek law. In Essays in honour of Penelope Agallopoulou. K. Delouka, P. Kanellopoulos and E. Nina-Pazarzi. Athens/Komotini: Ant. N. Sakkoulas, pp. 1399 et seq.
Valtoudis, A. 2009. Damages and unjust enrichment in copyright law [in Greek]. Chronika Idiotikou Dikaiou: 203 et seq.
Valtoudis, A. 2010. Articles 908 and 909. In Brief commentary of the civil code (SEAK), volume I [in Greek], ed. A. Georgiades. Athens: Law & Economy – P. N. Sakkoulas.
Zervogianni, E. 2006. The restoration of status quo ante as form of damage compensation [in Greek]. Athens/Komotini: Ant. N. Sakkoulas.
Table of Cases
Supreme Court
Areios Pagos 109/2012, Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 284/2012, Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 416/2012, Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 839/2012, Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 1007/2011, ChrID 2012, 256
Areios Pagos 1054/2011, Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 1326/2011 Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 493/2010, ChrID 2011, 338
Areios Pagos 652/2010, DEE 2010, 943
Areios Pagos 1468/2010, EfAD 2011, 100
Areios Pagos (full bench), 6/2009, Arm 2009, 1162
Areios Pagos 654/2009, Intrasoft-Nomos
Areios Pagos 1432/2009, ChrID 2010, 440
Areios Pagos 430/2005, DEE 2005, 460
Areios Pagos 1219/2001, DEE 2001, 2001
Areios Pagos (full bench), 17/1999, DEE 2000, 181
Areios Pagos 940/1995, NoV 1997, 1109
Appeal
Athens Court of Appeals 147/2004, NoV 2005, 289
Athens Court of Appeals 3346/1996, EllDni 1998, 667
Athens Court of Appeals 454/1990, EllDni 1991, 198
Piraeus Court of Appeals 478/2008, DEE 2008, 1371
First Instance
Multi member Court of First Instance of Athens 1808/2010, Intrasoft-Nomos
Multi member Court of First Instance of Athens 1912/2010, Intrasoft-Nomos
Multi member Court of First Instance of Athens 4661/2004, NoV 2005, 114
Single member Court of First Instance of Athens 1726/2013, Isokratis databank
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zervogianni, E. (2015). Disgorgement of Profits in Greece. In: Hondius, E., Janssen, A. (eds) Disgorgement of Profits. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18759-4_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18759-4_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18758-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18759-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)