MORRISON & FONTANA

Morrison & Fontana concerned a dispute between the parties regarding the interpretation of a deed of settlement. The matter came before Harland J in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the deed of settlement, which purported to resolve all claims between the parties, effectively extinguished a specific claim for damages arising from a breach of contract that occurred after the deed was executed. The Court was required to determine the scope and effect of the release contained within the deed.

Harland J reasoned that the language of the deed, particularly the phrase "all claims, demands, actions, suits, causes of action, proceedings, and liabilities whatsoever," indicated a clear intention to release all existing and future claims. His Honour applied the principle that clear and unambiguous language in a deed of settlement will be given its ordinary meaning, and that such a release would extend to claims that were in existence at the time of the deed, even if their full extent was not yet known. The Court found that the subsequent breach of contract, while occurring after the deed, gave rise to a cause of action that was contemplated by the broad wording of the release.

The Court therefore held that the claim for damages arising from the post-deed breach of contract was extinguished by the deed of settlement.