header-logo header-logo

24 April 2015 / Adam Short
Issue: 7649 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

How broad is your settlement?

nlj_24_04_15_short

Don’t settle for less, says Adam Short

When parties wish to settle litigation they will often do so by reference to the claim number in that litigation. For instance, a settlement agreement may include wording such as: “In full and final settlement of the claim in proceedings number [X] the parties agree as follows.”

However, the recent case of Brazier v News Group Newspapers [2015] EWHC 125 (Ch), [2015] All ER (D) 209 (Jan) illustrates that a settlement using such wording may, in fact, result in a settlement of wider scope than the parties (or at least one of them) envisaged. As such, parties must take extra care when drafting settlement agreements to ensure that they are not settling claims they do not intend to.

The facts in Brazier

Mr Brazier was of interest to the tabloid newspapers because of his relationship with Jade Goody. In February 2012, Brazier brought a claim against News Group Newspapers (NGN) in relation to the interception of voicemail messages left on his mobile phone (now commonly

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll