Indemnity in an NDA: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{confiprov|Indemnity}} {{Indemnitycapsule}} An indemnity is not usually justified in a confidentiality agreement. This will not stop people insisting on them.")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{confiprov|Indemnity}}
{{confianat|Indemnity}}
{{Indemnitycapsule}}
{{Indemnitycapsule}}


An [[indemnity]] is not usually justified in a [[confidentiality agreement]]. This will not stop people insisting on them.
An [[indemnity]] is not usually justified in a [[confidentiality agreement]]. This will not stop people insisting on them.

Revision as of 14:23, 2 July 2019

NDA Anatomy™
Club.png

The OneNDA clause
Template:OneNDA Indemnity view template


Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

Under an indemnity, one party (the “indemnifier”) agrees to pay the other the “indemnified”) an agreed amount should a specified event occur during the contract.[1]

The “events” covered by an indemnity are usually unexpected costs and expenses the indemnified party incurs while performing obligations under the contract, the benefits of which accrue exclusively to the indemnifying party: things like tax charges levied on a custodian relating to assets it holds for its clients. Without an indemnity, the party incurring these costs would just have to wear them. This would be a windfall for the benefiting party.

An indemnity thus creates a payment obligation under the contract where one would not otherwise exist. If the indemnified event occurs and the indemnifier doesn’t pay, the indemnifiee has an action in breach of contract.

And that’s about it. An indemnity gives you a right to sue where, without it, you would not have one.

Indemnity for breach of contract? No, sir.

In any case, indemnities should not, ever, cover losses arising from breach of contract. Like, ever. Anyone who tells you anything different — and in this old salt’s long and grim experience, many people who should know far better will — should be directed to the coat check. Here is why: if the other guy has breached the contract, Q.E.D. you have a right of action under the contract. You don’t need an indemnity. This is self-evidently true.

An indemnity is not usually justified in a confidentiality agreement. This will not stop people insisting on them.

  1. When you put it like that it sounds rather like a derivative, doesn’t it?