MADSEN & JEROME

In the matter of *Madsen & Jerome*, Young J of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was required to determine a dispute concerning the interpretation of a deed of settlement. The parties to the deed were the plaintiffs, Madsen and Jerome, and the defendant, a company. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the defendant had breached the terms of the deed by failing to make certain payments.

The primary legal issue before the Court was to ascertain the true construction of clause 3 of the deed of settlement. This clause stipulated the conditions under which the defendant was obliged to make payments to the plaintiffs. The Court had to determine whether the events that transpired after the execution of the deed triggered the defendant's payment obligations as contemplated by the parties at the time of settlement.

Young J applied the principles of contractual interpretation, focusing on the ordinary meaning of the words used in the deed, read in their context. His Honour considered the surrounding circumstances known to the parties at the time of the deed's execution to understand their intentions. The Court found that the defendant's actions did not satisfy the conditions precedent for the payment obligations under clause 3 to arise. Consequently, the Court held that the defendant had not breached the deed.