United Rural Enterprises Pty Limited v Lopmand Pty Limited

United Rural Enterprises Pty Limited (URE) and Lopmand Pty Limited (Lopmand) were parties to litigation concerning the interpretation of terms of settlement that resolved a dispute between three individuals involved in real estate development projects. The appeal was heard by Sheller, Santow, and Tobias JJA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the terms of settlement contained an ambiguity that justified the admission of extrinsic evidence to ascertain their meaning. The court was required to determine the correct construction of the settlement agreement in light of the parties' arguments regarding its interpretation.

The court found that the terms of settlement were not ambiguous and therefore extrinsic evidence was inadmissible to aid in their construction. Even if such evidence had been admitted, the court concluded that it would not have supported the interpretation advanced by the appellant. The principles of contractual interpretation, which favour a plain reading of the contract's language in the absence of ambiguity, were applied.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.