“The cyberattack forced Clorox to take systems offline, pause manufacturing, and rely on manual order processing for weeks,” it said. The cyberattack caused Clorox about $380 million in damages, including over $49 million in remedial costs, and “hundreds of millions of dollars in business interruption losses,” the lawsuit claimed.
Legal implications for vendor accountability
“This lawsuit may shift breach response from an operational process to a legal calculus — transforming how enterprises negotiate liability, assign contractual burden, and architect resilience,” Gogia explained.
Clorox’s complaint included four causes of action: breach of contract, breach of good faith and fair dealing, gross negligence, and intentional misrepresentation. The gross negligence claim characterizes Cognizant’s conduct as “an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of care.”
Read the full article here
