An interesting decision from the United States (11th Circuit appeals court) in Silvertop Systems -- decision here.
There is an interesting discussion of consequential loss, that starts at the heading "LMT's Counterclaim for Breach of Contract"
Facts were these:
·
Supplier
(Silverpop) provided an email marketing service. Customers loaded up
email addresses and Supplier would send out mass emails in a form
specified by the customer
to addresses on the list.
·
Hackers got into the Supplier’s system and got access to several customer’s marketing lists, including LMT’s list.
·
The
contract between Silverpop and LMT had a confidentiality clause
(obligation to protect the list against unauthorised disclosure to third
parties) and an exclusion
of consequential loss.
·
Amongst
the claims and counterclaims, was a claim from LMT that Silverpop had
breached the confidentiality obligation and that the damage suffered by
LMT was the sale
value of the marketing list, which they said was now worthless.
T
his is what the court decided – assuming it was correct that the value of the marketing list was now
zero, that was a consequential loss. The court discussed the difference
between general damages and consequential
damages (which is remarkably similar to the old English decision of Hadley v Baxendale). The direct loss which would have been recoverable by LMT
if there had been a breach of the confidentiality obligation was the
loss of the value of the service (but that is
not what LMT claimed).