Grant v John Grant and Sons Pty Ltd: 1 Jun 1954

(High Court of Australia) Contract – Deed of release – Recitals – Limitation – Claims not in contemplation unaffected – Equitable considerations affecting release – General words.
Dixon CJ said: ‘No doubt it is possible a priori that the release was framed in general terms in the hope of blotting out, so to speak, all conceivable grounds of further disputes or claims between all or any two or more parties to the deed, whether in respect of matters disclosed by a party against whom a claim might be made or undisclosed, of matters within the knowledge of a party by whom a claim might be made or outside it. If so the case would fall within the exception which, in the passage already cited, Lord Northington [Lord Keeper Henley] made from his proposition that a release ex vi termini imports a knowledge in the releasor of what he releases, namely the exception expressed by the words ‘unless upon a particular and solemn composition for peace persons expressly agree to release uncertain demands’ (Salkeld v Vernon).’

Judges:

Dixon C.J.(1), Webb(2), Fullagar(1), Kitto(1) and Taylor(1) JJ.

Citations:

[1954] HCA 23, (1954) 91 CLR 112

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Citing:

CitedSalkeld v Vernon 1758
A party may, at any rate in a compromise agreement supported by valuable consideration, agree to release claims or rights of which he is unaware and of which he could not be aware, even claims which could not on the facts known to the parties have . .

Cited by:

CitedBank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali, Khan and others (No 1); BCCI v Ali HL 1-Mar-2001
Cere Needed Releasing Future Claims
A compromise agreement which appeared to claim to settle all outstanding claims between the employee and employer, did not prevent the employee later claiming for stigma losses where, at the time of the agreement, the circumstances which might lead . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.342301