header-logo header-logo

12 April 2024 / C Haward Soper
Issue: 8066 / Categories: Features , Profession , Contract , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Consequential loss: searching for the meaning

167816
What’s the true meaning of ‘consequential loss’? C Haward Soper consults the case law—and that other authoritative source, ChatGPT…
  • Considers what commercial professionals mean by the term ‘consequential loss’ and provides a summary of relevant case law.
  • Compares these definitions with those given as a result of entering prompts into ChatGPT, showing that AI’s usefulness in this area is limited for now.

All contract professionals will be aware of—and perhaps scared of—consequential loss. It’s a matter of interest to any lawyer engaged in the drafting of indemnities or exclusion clauses, whether in general commercial contracts or in mergers and acquisitions.

To help clarify the meaning of the term, I have consulted the relevant case law—and enlisted the help of an expert, ChatGPT, for advice. According to CBS News, one lawyer used ChatGPT last year to prepare for a court hearing. It went horribly awry, with ChatGPT inventing ‘court cases that didn’t exist’. My experiments in AI also show that its usefulness is limited.

Precise limitation

Why

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll