Puttick v Tenon Limited (formerly called Fletcher Challenge Forests Limited)

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Mr Puttick against Tenon Limited (formerly Fletcher Challenge Forests Limited) concerning the interpretation of a deed of release. Mr Puttick had been employed by the respondent and, upon his termination, entered into a deed of release with his employer. He later sought to bring proceedings against the respondent for alleged breaches of contract and misleading and deceptive conduct, which the respondent argued were covered by the deed of release.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the general words of release contained in the deed extended to claims that Mr Puttick might have had against the respondent at the time of signing the deed, but which were not specifically contemplated or known to him at that time. The court had to determine the scope and effect of the release, particularly in light of the principle that a general release may not extinguish unknown claims unless there is clear and unequivocal language to that effect.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, held that the deed of release did not operate to release Mr Puttick's claims. The Court reasoned that while the deed contained broad language, it did not sufficiently demonstrate an intention to release claims that were unknown to Mr Puttick at the time of execution. Applying established principles of contractual interpretation, the Court found that the general words of release should be read in conjunction with the specific recitals and operative clauses of the deed, which did not indicate an intention to release unknown causes of action. The Court emphasised that for a release to extinguish unknown claims, the language must be exceptionally clear and leave no room for doubt.

The appeal was allowed, and the orders of the lower courts were set aside. Mr Puttick was granted leave to pursue his claims against Tenon Limited.