Publication
Motor Finance Redress: The Way Ahead
On August 1, 2025, the UK Supreme Court delivered its long-awaited judgment in Hopcraft v Close Brothers Limited and on 3 August the FCA announced it would consult on a redress scheme.
Pleading the element of inducement for tortious interference with contract claims
New York Law Journal
In 1980, the New York Court of Appeals adopted §766 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts as the standard for a cause of action for tortious interference with contract in New York. Guard-Life v. S. Parker Hardware Mfg., 50 N.Y.2d 183, 189-90 (1980); see Alken Indus. v. Toxey Leonard & Assocs., 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 31864(U), at *5 (Suffolk Co. Aug. 2, 2013). The Restatement defines tortious interference with contract as “intentionally and improperly interfer[ing] with the performance of a contract… between another and a third person by inducing or otherwise causing the third person not to perform the contract.” Restatement (Second) of Torts §766 (Am. L. Inst. 1977). The requirement in this definition of “inducing or otherwise causing” the third person not to perform its contract has been extensively litigated in New York courts, which have required a somewhat heightened pleading standard for that element.
Read the full New York Law Journal article, "Pleading the element of inducement for tortious interference with contract claims."
Recent publications
Publication
Germany delivers landmark copyright ruling against OpenAI: What it means for AI and IP
The Regional Court of Munich (LG München I) has issued a landmark judgment in GEMA v OpenAI (Case No. 42 O 14139/24), holding that the use of copyrighted song lyrics for training generative AI models without a licence violates German copyright law.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .