In the system of tortious and contractual liability, damages are divided into two categories: compensatory and non-compensatory. The legal system's focus in non-compensatory damages goes beyond the harm inflicted on the right-holders. In some of these damages (such as punitive damages), the wrongdoer’s bad faith and the extent of their wrongdoing are considered, and damages are determined accordingly. In another category, damages are calculated based on the benefits the violator gained through the infringement of rights. The latter category is referred to as gain-based damages. The disgorgement damages derived from the infringement of rights also falls under this group.

However, the fundamental question is: First, what is the need to recognize a new method of remedy such as disgorgement? Second, What is the basis for accepting the disgorgement damages in the civil liability system? This basis must encompass two key points:

1. Why are profits taken from the wrongdoer?

2. Why are these profits returned to the right-holders (and not to another party, such as the government)?

Several reasons, including helping to achieve the goals of civil liability, preventing conflicts of interest, filling gaps in compensatory damages, etc., require the recognition and acceptance of the aforementioned remedy in the Iranian legal system.

In addition, Various justifications have been proposed in this regard. Nevertheless, it appears that the principle of deterrence and unjust enrichment (in its broad sense) can adequately address the aforementioned questions. In any case, this paper attempts to examine the issue through an analytical-descriptive approach, with a comparative perspective on the legal systems of the United States, England, and Iran.