Publication
Global Asset Management Review: Issue 4
Welcome to the third issue of Global Asset Management Review.
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
Welcome to the third issue of Global Asset Management Review.
Publication
On 13 November 2025, the European Parliament adopted (subject to certain amendments) the substantive Omnibus Directive which was proposed by the European Commission on 26 February 2025 (see our previous briefing here). On 16 December 2025, the European Parliament adopted further proposed amendments.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025