How to assess software quality in contract disputes: defining ‘defective code’ in legal terms

When software doesn’t perform as expected, it can cause serious ripple effects—missed deadlines, lost revenue, and even broken business relationships. In contract disputes involving software, one question often takes center stage: Was the code defective?

That question might seem simple, but defining “defective” in legal terms requires much more than pointing to a few bugs. It demands an expert evaluation of functionality, performance, reliability, and whether the software met the standards outlined in the contract or accepted in the industry.

At Eureka Software, we specialize in providing clear, actionable insight during these kinds of disputes. In this post, we’ll walk through how software quality is assessed in contract litigation—and how expert analysis can be the difference between a claim that sticks and one that falls apart.

What Makes Code “Defective” in a Legal Context?

In a courtroom, “defective” doesn’t necessarily mean the software has a few glitches or needs a patch. Instead, courts look at whether the software failed to meet the promises outlined in the contract. These promises might include:

The bar for proving a defect isn’t perfection—it’s reasonable performance aligned with agreed-upon expectations.

Step 1: Reviewing the Contract

Every evaluation starts with the contract itself. This document defines the scope of work, deliverables, timelines, and responsibilities. It’s also the foundation for any defect-related claim.

Key contract elements we analyze include:

Even when a contract is vague or silent about specific standards, courts may still enforce reasonable expectations, often grounded in industry norms or standard practices.

Step 2: Functional Testing and Code Review

To determine if the software meets the contract's requirements, our experts conduct extensive testing and code analysis. This may include:

Functional Testing

We test the software to verify that it performs all the required tasks. If key functions are broken, missing, or poorly implemented, they may be considered defective.

Bug Severity and Frequency

A few minor bugs? Probably not a breach. But if the software crashes regularly, loses data, or performs inconsistently, those flaws may rise to the level of a breach, especially if they impact business operations.

Usability and Stability

Even if the software technically works, it may still be defective if it’s unreasonably difficult to use, lacks documentation, or experiences frequent failures under normal usage.

Step 3: Measuring Against Industry Standards

When contracts don’t spell out specific technical requirements, the law often turns to industry standards for guidance. This includes:

At Eureka Software, our team brings decades of experience across a wide range of software platforms, from legacy systems to modern applications. That deep background enables us to assess whether the software was developed according to professional standards, or if shortcuts resulted in unstable, buggy, or insecure code.

Step 4: Identifying Root Causes and Responsibility

Once defects are established, we dig into the “why”. Sometimes the issue lies with a rushed development process, a lack of testing, or poor design decisions. In other cases, the client may have changed requirements midstream or failed to provide critical inputs.

Our goal is to trace failures back to their source, so legal teams can understand not only what went wrong, but who is accountable.

Step 5: Communicating Findings in Court

Legal success doesn’t just depend on technical accuracy—it hinges on how well those findings are explained to judges and juries.

At Eureka Software, we take pride in our ability to translate complex code reviews into clear, understandable testimony. We support your case with:

We don’t just tell the court what went wrong—we show them in a way they can understand and trust.

Why Expert Analysis Makes the Difference

Contract disputes over software often boil down to one question: Did the product meet the expectations that were promised?

Answering that question requires more than pointing fingers—it requires in-depth, objective analysis of the code, the contract, and the standards that apply. That’s where we come in.

At Eureka Software, we’ve been building, reviewing, and analyzing software for over 38 years. We know what quality looks like—and we know how to explain it clearly in a courtroom.

Need Help with a Software Contract Dispute?

Asserting a claim or defending against one? Let Eureka Software’s expert witness team help you assess software quality, identify contract breaches, and present clear, persuasive findings in court.

Contact us today to learn more about how we support litigation involving defective code, software performance, and contractual obligations.