WINGROVE & NADEL

In the matter of *Wingrove & Nadel*, Newbrun J of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was required to determine a dispute concerning the interpretation of a deed of settlement and its application to a claim for rectification. The applicants sought to rectify the deed, alleging it did not accurately reflect the parties' true intentions at the time of its execution, specifically regarding the release of certain claims.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicants had established the necessary grounds for rectification of the deed of settlement. This involved considering the principles governing equitable relief for rectification, particularly the requirement to demonstrate a common intention that was not accurately recorded in the written instrument, and the effect of a clear and unambiguous release clause within the deed.

Newbrun J applied the well-established principles of rectification, noting that the onus rests on the party seeking rectification to prove with a high degree of certainty that the written document fails to conform to the parties' actual agreement. The court examined the evidence presented by the applicants, including their own testimony and surrounding circumstances, to ascertain whether a common intention existed that differed from the express terms of the deed. The judge found that the deed contained a clear and unambiguous release of the claims in question, and the applicants had failed to adduce sufficient evidence to demonstrate that this was not the common intention of the parties at the time of settlement.

Consequently, Newbrun J dismissed the application for rectification, upholding the plain meaning of the deed of settlement as executed.