Justice Levine dissented from the majority decision of the Fourth District Court to invalidate the compensation agreement and said that the importance of preserving contractual rights should override public policies to protect the rights of an injured child. The Court of Appeal disagreed and upheld the agreement. The use of the word „operation“ shows that the airline has agreed, in terms of construction, to fly the aircraft commercially – thus providing a passenger service. The contract, which was read as a whole, also showed that the aircraft had to take off and land at the airport on each operating day. If it could not do so for technical reasons, it would not cause the airline to break up. In addition, the frequency of flights or the destination of flights was the responsibility of the company. This case is another example of the Court of Appeal disagreeing with the judge and finds that the contract was ultimately enforceable. After the failure of this agreement, the responsibility fell on Russia to show that it can maintain an agreement, said analyst Kupchan. A right to a given benefit is the main, most obvious and most fundamental remedy in the event of a breach of contract, because it maintains the interest of the creditor: if you enter into a contract, you expect a benefit in relation to it.