Hollingsworth v Humphrey: CA 10 Dec 1987

The parties disputed the effect of a Tomlin order, an order made by the court that stayed the proceedings on the terms of a compromise ‘except for the purpose of carrying the said terms into effect’. The defendant had failed to honour the contract and the judge awarded damages against him.
Held: The defendant’s appel succeeded. Fox LJ: ‘It was not open to the judge to make an award of damages
It seems to me that under the terms of the Tomlin order the only jurisdiction that he had in this action to make an order for the purpose of carrying into effect the terms of the compromise. An award of damages is not carrying the terms into effect. It is granting a remedy for breach of contract. In my view any claim by Mrs Hollingsworth for breach of contract must be pursued in a separate action.’


Fox LJ


Unreported, 10-Dec-87


England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedOrton v Collins and others ChD 23-Apr-2007
The court considered how a Part 36 offer could be treated as accepted when it involved an agreement to transfer land, because the offer and its acceptance would not operate under the 1989 Act.
Held: The agreement was enforceable. The Civil . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Contract

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.251428