§ 147.121.Damage Limitations Apply Only If Defendant Shows Good Faith Effort to Cure or Correct

A conditioning provision, and it is the chapter’s clearest statement of the bargain it offers.

The limitations on recovery in the next section apply to a claimant only if the defendant can show a good faith effort to cure, correct, avoid, or mitigate the claimant’s possible computer date failure problem.

The protection has to be earned. A defendant that did nothing about the problem gets no damages cap, and faces the ordinary measure.

"Good faith" is defined in the chapter as honesty in fact in the conduct or transaction concerned — a subjective standard, borrowed from commercial law, that asks about the defendant’s actual state of mind rather than the reasonableness of what it did.

Four verbs describe what qualifies — cure, correct, avoid, or mitigate — and the range matters. A defendant need not have solved the problem; an honest effort to reduce or avoid it counts.

"The claimant’s possible computer date failure problem" is oddly worded but deliberate. "Possible" reflects that much of this work was done before anyone knew which systems would fail, and directs attention to effort rather than outcome.

The burden is on the defendant — it must show the effort — so the caps are not a default.

Read with the cure-or-correct defence, the chapter offers a graduated reward: an adequate cure offered in time is a complete defence, and a good faith effort short of that limits the damages.