英语翻译翻译成中文,5000字以上,拒绝翻译软件.我试过,狗屁不通,翻译选中的追加200分,绝无戏言,封我ID,都用了3

英语翻译
翻译成中文,5000字以上,拒绝翻译软件.我试过,狗屁不通,翻译选中的追加200分,绝无戏言,封我ID,都用了3年了!
Introduction
The nature of restitutionary1 and exemplary damages,the relationship between these two problematic categories of damages,as well as the possible ways forward (particularly with regard to the award of exemplary damages in the context of a breach of contract) raise a plethora of issues that could be thoroughly examined only in a book or,at the least,a small monograph.The present article can therefore only adopt a much more modest approach.Our primary task is to raise issues.To be sure,we will attempt some preliminary suggestions and answers whenever relevant.However,in the nature of things,an even close to definitive analysis as well as a set of conclusions would require far more wide-ranging analyses.We take as our initial point of departure the recent Federal Court of Australia decision of Hospitality Group Pty Ltd v Australian Rugby Union Ltd,the facts of which were both complex and interesting.Issues pertaining to both restitutionary and exemplary damages were raised in a fact situation that embraced both the contractual and tortious contexts.We will shift from the particular to the general.The first part of this article will consider the facts of the Hospitality Group case,and the second will consider the issues arising with respect to restitutionary damages.In the third part,we will consider the various issues arising with respect to exemplary damages,and we will summarise our main findings and suggestions in the Conclusion.We should add,however,that our primary focus will be on exemplary damages,having already canvassed a number of issues with regard to restitutionary damages in an earlier article in this journal.A few additional issues with respect to restitutionary damages do arise,however,and we will consider them briefly.We add that we do consider (particularly in the context of exemplary damages) a great many decisions across the Commonwealth; hence,the present article contains a comparative perspective as well.

导言
赔偿性和惩戒性的损害赔偿之间的关系,这两个问题的类别的损害赔偿,以及为将来可能采取的办法（尤其是关于授予惩戒性的损害赔偿,在一个违反合同） ,提出过多的问题可以彻底检查,只有在一本书或者至少一个小的专着.本条款,因此只能采取一种更为温和的方式.我们的首要任务是提出问题.可以肯定的是,我们将尝试一些初步建议,并回答了有关问题.不过,在事情的性质更接近确切的分析以及一套结论将需要更为广泛的分析.我们借此作为我们最初的出发点是近期澳洲联邦法庭的决定,招待费集团 Sales Co Ltd诉澳大利亚橄榄球联盟有限公司,事实,其中既复杂又有趣.有关的问题都赔偿性和惩戒性的损害赔偿提出了一个事实上的局面,既富时代感,又有合同和侵权问题.我们将转向从特别到一般.第一部分,本文将考虑事实的招待费组案例,第二个问题,将考虑这些问题所带来的尊重赔偿性损害赔偿.在第三部分中,我们会考虑所产生的各种问题方面的惩戒性的损害赔偿,我们会总结我们的主要结论和建议,并在结论.我们还应补充说,不过,我们的首要重点将是对惩戒性的损害赔偿,它已经收集到的一些问题就赔偿性损害赔偿在早先的文章中,这journal.a数增发方面赔偿性y损害赔偿的出现,然而,我们会考虑他们一下.我们补充说,我们做的考虑（尤其是在语境的惩戒性的损害赔偿） ,一个伟大的决策,很多全国各地英联邦;因此,本条款包含了比较分析的角度.