Efficient breach

The motivating factor for establishing the standards of efficient breach was to ensure that the agreement fell under the enforceable fixing of the damages by the execution.

As Richard Posner and Andrew Rosenfeld put the point, "the more efficiently the exchange is structured, the larger is the potential profit of the contract for the parties to divide between them.

"[5] Judge Richard Posner gave a well-known illustration of efficient breach:[6] Suppose I sign a contract to deliver 100,000 custom-ground widgets at $0.10 apiece to A, for use in his boiler factory.

[7] Others argue that the costs of litigation relevant to gaining expectation damages from breach would leave one or both of the original parties worse off than if the contract had simply been performed.

[9] Scholars in the fields of law and economics have performed a comprehensive study of effective breach of contract cases.

[10] For academics, both moral and constructive, tortious action is vexing because it supports the economic model of "successful violation of contract" by punishing a third party for inducing breach.

Nonetheless, academics have discovered a secondary rationale for invention to explain the coexistence of "successful" breaches and infringement interference.

The regression study of infringement intrusion proceedings demonstrates even more plainly that the second best factors proposed by effective breach researchers are insufficient to justify the case's result.