Some contracts stipulate that one or both parties can seek injunctive relief in cases of breach, in the hope that the court will order the breaching party (1) to stop what it's doing, or (2) to do what it allegedly should be doing. Such a stipulation can cause real trouble for the party that's the target of the injunction request.

Heads-up: Waiver of proof of irreparable harm

In most (U.S.) jurisdictions, a party seeking an injunction not only must ask for equitable relief, it must also prove 'irreparable harm,' and/or the inadequacy of money damages, before the judge will consider granting the injunction. If you think you might someday be the target of an injunction claim, you should be extremely careful about agreeing in advance to waive proof of irreparable harm and inadequacy of money damages. You might unknowingly be making a very significant concession, and possibly handicapping your trial counsel if litigation were to ever to arise.

(Cf. "Judge Tells RIAA: Irreparable Harm Doesn't Mean What You Think It Means," TechDirt, Jun. 21, 2007 (accessed Oct. 21, 2007).

Heads-up: Waiver of bond requirement

A party seeking preliminary injunctive relief would ordinarily be required to post a bond as a prerequisite to having the injunction actually go into effect. The bond serves as a cash pool to compensate the enjoined party (for example, for its lost business) if it later turns out that the injunction wasn't appropriate after all. In contract negotiations, some parties may ask you to waive the bond requirement; if you were to agree to this, you might seriously regret your decision later.