Tort of inducing Breach of Contract - the Criteria for Intent

A recent Canadian decision by the New Brunswick Court of Appeal in SAR Petroleum et al v Peace Hills Trust Company 2010 NBCA 22 held that the tort of inducing breach of contract (or interfering with contractual relations) only arises if the breach was the desired end or means to an end. The fact that a breach is merely a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's actions was insufficient to establish the tort.

In doing so, the Canadian court adopted the position taken by the English House of Lords in OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1, reflecting wider recognition that mere foreseeability does not amount to an intention to cause a breach.

Australian courts have not yet adopted this position, but it is expected that Australian defendants will begin to argue this in the near future.

Background

In the Canadian case, the Court of Appeal rejected that the respondent, Peace Hills Trust Company...