On the other hand, the seller, as a manufacturer/seller of a product, could face a large number of consecutive damages if he does not deliver the products on time or if he does not supply defective products and, as such, the seller will want to insist that the damage is not taken into account. The disclosure parties want to maintain indirect damages provisions in the confidentiality agreement and the parties receiving them want to remove them. The best practice would be to define “direct damage” to include some of the types of damage that a dividing party might expect from prohibited disclosure or abuse. In this way, some indirect damage can be identified as direct damage. The more the damage can be quantified, the more likely it is that an agreement will be reached. In addition, a receiving party may insist on a shorter period of time to be required to keep the information confidential or waive the need for a loan when it requests a cease and desealed action. Let`s take a simple example: if you are hit by a car, your hospital and physiotherapy bills are clearly direct damage. On the other hand, if you are unemployed for six months to recover from your injuries, your wages lost during this period are consequential damages. Note that, although the damage is significant in terms of financial impact on you, it is no less real than direct damage.
The same goes for a business scenario. “A violation of any of the undertakings or agreements contained in it results in irreparable and persistent harm to the discloser, for which there will be no proper legal remedy, and Discloser is entitled to rights to omission and/or a special enforcement decree and another exemption that may be reasonable (including, if applicable, financial damages).”  Below, you will find a list of common examples of consecutive damages in a commercial context: If an NDA containing a stay clause is presented to a start-up, the first option is to return the clause and request the removal of the clause. When the other company is very large and has leverage in the transaction, this requirement is often rejected. In such cases, we advise startups to be extremely careful with the confidential information disclosed and to avoid disclosing information that is not related to technologies otherwise protected by patents or copyrights, and certainly confidential information that is not directly relevant to the specific purpose of the NDA (an investment decision, a particular transaction or a potential agreement, etc.). In the end, a start-up may not have the financial means to prosecute NDA violations, which is why your highest and best protection is often to significantly limit the amount of information you want to disclose. In theory, the definition of consecutive damage is not so complicated, but in the application, the results are mixed. As a general rule, commercial contracts involve an exclusion of damages, but one of the reasons to object to such a disclaimer may be simply to avoid litigation and costly litigation in order to determine whether the injury of a party was immediate or consequential. In the current business climate, confidentiality agreements are often used, but standard versions no longer adequately protect both parties, any use must be verified and tailored to the purpose. Since it is one of the most important agreements used on a daily basis by many companies, it deserves a little more attention to detail.
It is particularly important to reassess damages with respect to data privacy and security obligations.