In part 1, I shared about DA and GG, who commenced an abortive lawsuit against a nanny for allegedly causing emotional distress to their children...

...by quitting suddenly.

In part 2, I'll share some learning points for those considering suing over broken promises.

--

1️⃣ Before commencing litigation, consider how much you can realistically claim.

DA and GG sought damages against the nanny because her departure had allegedly affected their ability to earn income, and punitive damages for the alleged "egregious disregard to the interests of the children."¹

While the nanny's abrupt departure must have been very annoying and troublesome for DA and GG, this does not automatically mean that they are entitled to monetary damages. And the entitlement to and quantum of monetary damages is an important part of the decision on whether to sue.²

Here, damages is a matter of Canadian law, so I say no more on the merits of the claim. But some of you may still be wondering whether it was ever worth it for DA and GG to sue.

Well, it probably helps that DA is a practicing lawyer (h/t Huimin Hu for the incisive question), so they probably didn't have to incur any legal costs or spend time instructing counsel. But the question remains as to whether this was a fruitful use of DA and GG's time and energy.

And for completeness, folks are sometimes prepared to sue as a matter of principle, and knowing full well that they may end up out of pocket. That's certainly their prerogative, so if you're facing a claim, don't assume that you won't be sued just because you think the claim is uncommercial.

2️⃣ Before commencing litigation, consider whether you're prepared to go all the way.

Clearly, DA and GG weren't.

Which begs the question of why they commenced litigation in the first place.

I mean, I get it. Folks change their minds all the time, and are entitled to do so.

I just wonder:
a) how much thought went into the initial decision to file suit;
b) what changed after the suit was filed, such that DA and GG were no longer prepared to proceed; and
c) whether DA and GG's energies would have been better spent on and with their children.

3️⃣ Before commencing litigation, consider the effects of publicity.

DA and GG may not have expected the media to pick up on their case.³

But it did.

DA and GG may now have to contend with:
a) prospective nannies potentially declining to accept an engagement after doing a quick Google of their names;⁴
b) snide remarks at dinner parties⁵ from pearl-clutching frenemies about how they would never have dreamt of suing a nanny; and
c) random LinkedIn users using their experience as a case study to offer unsolicited commentary and learning points.⁶

Plus: the Internet never forgets.

I wonder whether they had considered these possibilities before deciding to sue.