Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Jingalong Pty Limited v Todd [2015] NSWCA 7 Hearing dates: 3 December 2014 Decision date: 12 February 2015 Before: Meagher JA at [1];
Leeming JA at [2];
Sackville AJA at [3]Decision: 1. Appeal allowed.
2. Set aside orders 1-5 and 7-9 made by Kunc J on 10 April 2014.
3. In lieu of the orders identified in Order 2, make the following order:
Dismiss the Amended Statement of Claim filed on 18 February 2013.
4. Remit the Second Cross-Claim filed on 20 September 2013 to the Equity Division for further hearing in the light of these reasons for judgment.
5. The first and second respondents pay the appellant’s costs of the appeal.
6. The respondents, if otherwise qualified, have a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW).Catchwords: CONTRACT – Settlement Agreement executed by parties to Equity Division proceedings after mediation – whether Settlement Agreement binding and enforceable – whether Settlement Agreement was an accord executory or an accord and satisfaction Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
Real Property Act 1900 (NSW)Cases Cited: Blue Moon Grill Pty Ltd v Yorkey’s Knob Boating Club Inc [2006] QCA 253
British Russian Gazette and Trade Outlook Ltd v Associated Newspapers Ltd [1933] 2 KB 616
Chapmans Ltd v Australian Stock Exchange Ltd (1996) 67 FCR 402
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Hadidi (1994) 51 FCR 453
Forde v Beech (1848) 11 QB 852; 116 ER 693
Grave v Blazevic Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 329
International Air Transport Association v Ansett Australia Holdings Ltd [2008] HCA 3; 234 CLR 151
Macteldir Pty Ltd v Dimovski [2005] FCA 1528; 226 ALR 773
Masters v Cameron [1954] HCA 72; 91 CLR 353
McDermott v Black [1940] HCA 4; 63 CLR 161
Mohareb v Jankulovski [2013] NSWCA 462
Morris v Baron & Co [1918] AC 1
Neeta (Epping) Pty Ltd v Phillips [1974] HCA 18; 131 CLR 286
Nissho Iwai (Australia) Ltd v Oskar [1984] WAR 53
Osborn v McDermott [1998] 3 VR 1
Pacific Carriers Ltd v BNP Paribas [2004] HCA 35; 218 CLR 451
R & A Cab Co Pty Ltd v Rutty [2007] VSC 62
Scaffidi v Perpetual Trustees Victoria Ltd [2011] WASCA 159; 42 WAR 59
Scott v English [1947] VLR 445
Sigiriya Capital Pty Ltd v Scanlon [2013] NSWCA 401
Taylor v Johnson [1983] HCA 5; 151 CLR 422
Thompson v Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd [1996] HCA 38; 186 CLR 574
Todd v Jingalong Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 362
Toll (FGCT) Pty Ltd v Alphapharm Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 52; 219 CLR 165Texts Cited: K Lewison and D Hughes, The Interpretation of Contracts in Australia (2012, LawBook Co)
NC Seddon, RA Bigwood and MP Ellinghaus, Cheshire & Fifoot Law of Contract (10th Aust ed 2012, LexisNexis Butterworths)Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jingalong Pty Limited (Appellant)
Gregory George Todd (First Respondent)
Brett Pernice (Second…
Continue reading Jingalong Pty Ltd v Todd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Jingalong Pty Limited v Todd [2015] NSWCA 7
- Case
- [2015] NSWCA 7
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the settlement agreement constituted a binding and enforceable contract, or whether it remained an "accord executory" rather than an "accord and satisfaction." This distinction was critical to determining whether the parties were bound by the terms of the agreement or if the original dispute could be revived.
The Court of Appeal found that the settlement agreement was binding and enforceable. It reasoned that the parties had reached a final agreement on the essential terms, and the execution of the settlement agreement itself represented the satisfaction of the prior dispute, rather than merely an executory promise to settle. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the previous orders were set aside, and the amended statement of claim was dismissed, with the second cross-claim remitted for further hearing. The respondents were ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Appeal allowed.
2. Set aside orders 1-5 and 7-9 made by Kunc J on 10 April 2014.
3. In lieu of the orders identified in Order 2, make the following order:
Dismiss the Amended Statement of Claim filed on 18 February 2013.
4. Remit the Second Cross-Claim filed on 20 September 2013 to the Equity Division for further hearing in the light of these reasons for judgment.
5. The first and second respondents pay the appellant’s costs of the appeal.
6. The respondents, if otherwise qualified, have a certificate under the Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW).
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.