Tenants of a block of flats were in dispute with their management company. Some tenants had ceased paying rent, and forfeiture proceedings had begun. There had been a compromise of the forfeiture proceedings. The parties now disputed the extent to which the compromise settled other proceedings.
Held: The possibility of the claim now desired was known to the parties at the time of the compromise. However the compromise agreement should not be construed to a possible future claim under a resolution yet to be passed by the company.
Citations:
[2006] EWCA Civ 492
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International HL 12-Jun-1997
Allowance of Stigma Damages
The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination.
Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that . .
Cited – Bank 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.
Landlord and Tenant
Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241403