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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll