Chang v Su

In *Chang v Su* [2023] FCA 100, the Federal Court of Australia considered a dispute between the applicant, Mr. Chang, and the respondent, Mr. Su. The core of the disagreement concerned the enforceability of a settlement agreement reached between the parties in relation to prior litigation. Mr. Chang sought to enforce the terms of this settlement agreement, while Mr. Su resisted enforcement, alleging that the agreement was invalid or otherwise unenforceable.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether a binding settlement agreement had been validly concluded between the parties, and if so, whether Mr. Su was estopped from denying its validity or was otherwise bound by its terms. The Court also had to consider the implications of certain conduct by Mr. Su in the period following the purported agreement.

The Court found that the parties had indeed reached a binding settlement agreement. In its reasoning, the Court applied principles of contract law, particularly concerning offer, acceptance, and intention to create legal relations. It was held that the correspondence exchanged between the parties, viewed objectively, demonstrated a clear intention to be bound by the terms of the settlement. Furthermore, the Court found that Mr. Su's subsequent conduct, including his participation in steps taken to give effect to the settlement, supported the conclusion that a binding agreement existed and that he was estopped from asserting otherwise. The Court also considered the application of the doctrine of part performance, which further supported the enforceability of the agreement.

The Court ordered that the settlement agreement be specifically performed and entered judgment in favour of Mr. Chang.