header-logo header-logo

How broad is your settlement?

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

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

NEWS
The House of Lords has set up a select committee to examine assisted dying, which will delay the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
back-to-top-scroll