Valassis v Jones

Valassis v Jones concerned a dispute between the parties regarding the proper construction of a deed of settlement. The case was heard and determined by Kirby and Hayne JJ of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

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 alleged breaches of contract that occurred after the deed was executed. The Court was required to interpret the language of the deed to ascertain the parties' intention regarding the scope of the release.

The Court's reasoning focused on the principles of contractual interpretation, particularly the presumption that parties do not intend to release claims of which they are unaware or which have not yet arisen at the time of contracting. Kirby and Hayne JJ examined the wording of the release clause, considering its context within the entire deed and the surrounding circumstances known to the parties at the time of its execution. They concluded that the language used did not clearly and unambiguously extend to claims arising from future breaches, and therefore, the claim in question was not extinguished by the deed.

The Court found in favour of the plaintiff, Valassis, holding that the deed of settlement did not preclude the claim for damages arising from post-settlement breaches of contract.