Intentional interference with Prospective Economic Advantage
Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage
Intentional interference with prospective economic advantage is a legal concept that addresses the wrongful disruption of an economic relationship or expectation that has not yet ripened into a formal contract. This tort is particularly relevant in the business context, where companies often rely on expected relationships and future dealings for their economic growth. Unlike the tort of intentional interference with contractual relations, which requires the existence of a valid contract, this tort focuses on economic relationships that have potential future benefits.
Establishing a Claim
To establish a claim for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, a plaintiff must prove several key elements. These elements form the basis of understanding how this tort operates and are critical for a successful legal claim.
Economic Relationship with Probability of Future Benefit
The plaintiff must first establish that there was an existing economic relationship or a prospective economic relationship with a third party that had a reasonable probability of future economic benefit or advantage to the plaintiff. This relationship does not need to be formalized in a contract but must be more than mere speculation or hope. There must be a likelihood, grounded in a real and reasonable expectation, that the relationship would result in economic gain for the plaintiff.
Defendant’s Knowledge of the Relationship
The defendant must have had knowledge of this existing or prospective economic relationship. This knowledge does not require an understanding of every detail of the relationship but does require awareness that the relationship exists and that it carries a potential economic benefit to the plaintiff. The defendant’s awareness can be actual, where the defendant directly knew of the relationship, or constructive, where the defendant should have known about the relationship through reasonable diligence.
Intentional Acts of Interference
The defendant must have engaged in intentional acts designed to disrupt or derail the economic relationship. These acts must be purposeful and directed towards interfering with the plaintiff’s prospective economic advantage. The intention here is a key element, distinguishing accidental or incidental impacts on the plaintiff’s economic interests from targeted actions meant to cause disruption.
Actual Disruption of the Relationship
The defendant’s actions must have resulted in an actual disruption or interference with the prospective economic relationship. This means that the expected economic benefit or advantage was hindered, diminished, or entirely prevented because of the defendant’s conduct. The disruption must be a direct consequence of the defendant’s intentional actions.
Damages
Finally, the plaintiff must have suffered damages as a result of the interference. These damages can include lost profits, lost opportunities, or other economic harms that directly stem from the interference with the prospective economic relationship. The plaintiff must be able to demonstrate a causal link between the interference and the economic loss suffered.
It’s important to note that the law recognizes the right to compete fairly in the marketplace, and not all competitive actions that harm another’s economic expectations will rise to the level of this tort. The interference must be wrongful by some measure beyond merely being competitive or pursuing one’s own economic interests. This often involves conduct that is unethical, fraudulent, or in violation of established business practices.
Disclaimer: The content of this blog is intended solely for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Legal issues are complex and individual; as such, if you seek guidance on a specific legal concern, please consult with a licensed attorney. Contact A.E.I. Law, P.C. at (888)-423-4529 for personalized legal counsel.
