
Publication
Legalseas
Our shipping law insights provide legal and market commentary, addressing the key questions and topics of interest to our clients operating in the shipping industry, helping them to effectively manage risk.
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."
Publication
Our shipping law insights provide legal and market commentary, addressing the key questions and topics of interest to our clients operating in the shipping industry, helping them to effectively manage risk.
Publication
Our 23rd report spotlights landmark legislative reforms such as the UK’s new Arbitration Act 2025 and South Africa’s rise as a regional arbitration hub. We examine procedural innovations, enforcement challenges, and the evolving role of tribunals in promoting settlement.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025