## Facts

- Benjamin Lumley managed Her Majesty’s Theatre in London and contracted in writing with opera singer Johanna Wagner for exclusive performances for a fixed term.
- The agreement included a negative covenant barring Wagner from performing elsewhere during the term without Lumley’s written consent.
- Frederick Gye, manager of the rival Covent Garden Theatre, knew of Wagner’s exclusive contract with Lumley.
- Gye offered Wagner more favorable terms and intentionally induced her to refuse to perform for Lumley and to abandon the contract.
- Lumley alleged financial loss from losing Wagner’s promised services and associated profits.
- After related proceedings sought to restrain Wagner from performing elsewhere, Lumley pursued damages against Gye for procuring the breach.

## Issues

1. Whether a cause of action lies against a third party who knowingly and intentionally procures breach of an exclusive personal-services contract, causing loss to the promisee.
2. Whether such liability is limited to strict master–servant cases or extends to other hiring and personal-services relationships.
3. Whether the claim can be maintained when interference occurs before performance begins, while the contract is still executory.

## Decision

- The Queen’s Bench, by a 3–1 majority, held that Lumley stated a legally sufficient claim and could recover damages from Gye for procuring Wagner’s breach.
- The court ruled that liability is not confined to strict master–servant relationships; an exclusive personal-services engagement for a fixed term can qualify.
- The court rejected a distinction between interference before service begins and interference after performance has started, so long as the contract is in force and the procurement causes damage.
- In dissent, one judge would have limited the action to historically narrow servant-enticing cases and treated contract remedies as exclusive outside that category.

## Legal Principles

- A third party who, with notice of an existing contract, intentionally procures its breach and causes damage may be liable in tort to the injured contracting party.
- Exclusive personal-services contracts may be protected from deliberate procurement of breach even when the worker is not a “servant” in a strict, traditional sense.
- The actionable wrong focuses on intentional interference with another’s contractual right, not mere competition; knowledge/notice, intentional procurement, and resulting loss are required.
- The rationale supports liability whether the contract is executory or performance has commenced, provided the contract exists and the interference induces breach.

## Conclusion

The Queen’s Bench recognized tort liability for knowingly and intentionally inducing breach of an exclusive personal-services contract, extending protection of contractual relations beyond narrow master–servant categories and permitting recovery for losses caused by deliberate third-party procurement of breach.


Lumley v. Gye, (1853) 2 El. & Bl. 216 (Q.B.)