Is it objectionable for the schedule of a Tomlin order to stray beyond the confines of the proceedings?
Is it objectionable for the schedule of a Tomlin order to stray beyond the confines of the proceedings (eg, by dealing with payments not referable to the claim) and, if not, can all the heads of agreement be enforced in those same proceedings?
It is not objectionable and is sometimes a convenient way of recording settlement of issues which had not reached the stage of proceedings. The scheduled terms are not a judgment and are not directly enforceable as if they were.
Commonly, the stay order to which the terms are scheduled will give a party permission to apply for a judgment or further order in the event of breach.
An application for an order outside the original scope of the claim might well be refused as it would imply a need for amendment and some procedural complication when separate proceedings based on the settlement contract might well be more straightforward; but all will
.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=9a8f1ea9_1)
