SOLOMON & SOLOMON

In *Solomon & Solomon*, the Supreme Court of New South Wales was asked to determine a dispute between the parties concerning the interpretation of a deed of settlement. The core of the disagreement revolved around whether certain payments made by the defendant, Solomon, constituted a breach of the settlement agreement.

The primary legal issue before Altobelli J was whether the defendant's actions in making payments to a third party, which the plaintiff argued were in contravention of the deed's terms, amounted to a breach of contract. This required the court to construe the relevant clauses of the deed of settlement to ascertain the parties' intentions and the scope of their obligations.

Altobelli J reasoned that the deed of settlement, as a contract, should be interpreted according to its plain language, giving effect to the ordinary meaning of the words used. The court examined the specific wording of the clauses in question, considering the context of the entire agreement. His Honour concluded that the payments made by the defendant did not fall within the prohibited categories as defined by the deed, and therefore, no breach had occurred. The court applied established principles of contractual interpretation, focusing on the objective intention of the parties as evidenced by the written terms of the settlement.