Injunction: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
There common conception, at least among the draughtspeople of [[confidentiality agreement]]s, that one’s express acknowledgement that one’s contractual obligations are not of the type where [[damages]] will be an adequate remedy improve a litigant’s odds of winning an injunction later. It is common see [[confidentiality agreement]]s do just that.  
There common conception, at least among the draughtspeople of [[confidentiality agreement]]s, that one’s express acknowledgement that one’s contractual obligations are not of the type where [[damages]] will be an adequate remedy improve a litigant’s odds of winning an injunction later. It is common see [[confidentiality agreement]]s do just that.  


But — and here’s the snippy bit — in the commercial world, anything of value is meant to be quantifiable in the dollars and sense. [[Homo economicus]]’ view might be blinkered, it might be philistine — but it conforms to classic economics theory. So in one sense if the right you feel has been infringed, ''it can’t have been very valuable''. And so, in most cases where a [[confidentiality agreement]] bites, it seems: if (boring example) I give you my confidential shareholding arrangements so you can complete your [[KYC]] procedures, or if, for a fat payoff, you agree a gagging clause to not disclose the terrible things I did to you, and then you go and blab about these things, I might be embarrassed, but I am not likely to suffer pecuniary loss. Even with a customer list, it is likely to be consequential loss (loss of profits) so hard to recover under a normal contract action.
But — and here’s the snippy bit — in the commercial world, anything of value is meant to be quantifiable in the dollars and sense. [[Homo economicus]]’ view might be blinkered, it might be philistine — but it conforms to classic economics theory. So in one sense if the right you feel has been infringed, ''it can’t have been very valuable''.  
 
And so, in most cases where a [[confidentiality agreement]] bites, it seems: if (boring example) I give you my confidential shareholding arrangements so you can complete your [[KYC]] procedures, or if (racy one) for a fat payoff, you agree a gagging clause to not disclose the terrible things I did to you, and then you go and blab about these things, I might be embarrassed, but I am not likely to suffer pecuniary loss. Even with a customer list, it is likely to be consequential loss (loss of profits) so hard to recover under a normal contract action.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*{{confiprov|Remedies}} in the context of our lovely [[Confi Anatomy]]
*{{confiprov|Remedies}} in the context of our lovely [[Confi Anatomy]]

Navigation menu