§ 147.002.Action for Computer Date Failure

A scope provision drafted to be theory-proof.

Subject to the applicability exclusions, and regardless of the legal theory, statute, or cause of action on which the action is based, including an action based in tort, contract, or breach of an express or implied warranty, the chapter applies to an action seeking damages or any other relief for harm caused by: a computer date failure; or the failure to properly detect, disclose, prevent, report, correct, cure, or remediate one.

"Regardless of the legal theory" is the anti-avoidance clause, and the chapter would have been worth little without it. A defendant’s protections would evaporate if a claimant could escape them by pleading negligence rather than warranty, or DTPA rather than contract.

The second limb is the broader one. It reaches not the failure itself but the failure to deal with it — seven verbs covering detection, disclosure, prevention, reporting, correction, cure and remediation.

That is where the anticipated litigation was expected to concentrate. The claim was rarely going to be that a product broke; it was going to be that a vendor knew, said nothing, sold it anyway, or charged for the fix.

"Damages or any other relief" reaches injunctive and declaratory claims, so the chapter cannot be sidestepped by seeking something other than money.

The chapter is a set of limits on claims arising elsewhere, and the construction provision confirms it creates neither a duty nor a cause of action.