Impact have spotted an interesting judgment relating to settlement agreements that appears to be reported only on Lawtel and not in any of the journals yet. That’s unfortunate because it is confirms what most of us thought was the likeliest result, but which had not been decided by any higher court: breach of a settlement agreement gives rise to a cause of action by the other parties to the litigation.
Of course anyone dumb enough to breach an agreement risks enforced sharing of a shower with Bubba, since courts will take contempt of court somewhat seriously and settlement agreements are orders of the court. Nonetheless this judgement confirms the best guess that now it won’t just be the judge dishing out the kicking.
No surprise really, but still going to be preferable 99% of the time to get a Tomlin order anyway
Geeklawyer likes Tomlin Orders: a very profitable waste of time.
Unsurprising indeed.
On a completely unrelated note, what on earth are you doing putting an “e” in “judgment”?
Not guilty - it’s a US spelling checker; OK a bit guilty, but don’t you bloody start, I get enough from of that from bloody Ruthie.
Although I rather like the terms of the agreement being express on the face of the consent order, what is Geeklawyer’s objection to a sensibly drafted Tomlin?
As long as the Order includes liberty to apply, a quick(ish) application and away one comes with an enforcement order, preferably, in my line of work, with penal notice attached.
Personal service of a penal notice on a local authority head of housing is always entertaining and surprisingly effective.
Oh I’m not expressing hostility to a sensibly drafted Tomlin Order over any other options at all, I’ve drafted them many a time; I merely meant that litigation is a profitable (for me) waste of punters time.
Yes targeting the head cheese is always fun: particularly when they are out of the loop and it descends from a clear blue sky
Hi Martin, glad to see you’re keeping the pressure on whilst I’m away.
Thanks for mentioning our little story. Your post about our story has attracted more comments than the story itself! Ho-hum!
Alex,
Maybe, but most of it is personal abuse! I can heap personal abuse on you at your blog if that’ll make you feel better
Geeklawyer… Oh dear… another solecism…. blaming a spell checker…. excellent. As you know - I can spell. My fingers cannot always co-ordinate with my mind late at night - the evidence is spattered about on many of your comments sections.
I may well pop in and have a look at your blog tonight… I am dining tonight with topers and imbibers and gourmands. (I am not a gourmand - nor a gourmet - but, sadly, the Bollo have removed Liver and Bacon from the menu so I am not seeking counselling.
Without wishing to encourage traffic to my blawg - you might like to read what Mathew Norman said, today about Goldsmith - wonderful bit of prose.
a piu tarde
Sorry…that should be Matthew Norman…. throwing stones at glass houses comes to mind.
No problem, Ruthie; I thought someone should correct the poor fellow (we take 10% off a student’s essay if they misspell “judgment”.)
I do feel obliged to point out that, in an effort to cover his tracks, Geeklawyer has changed the spelling of “judgment” in the first line of his post. This does, however, seem a fairly futile gesture, especially in view of the fact that he has failed to do it in the third line from the end. So now he is not only wrong, he’s also inconsistent.
Bravo!
There, all manually corrected, happy? Perhaps I could reciprocate by pointing out the errors on your blog, but I won’t as that would just be petty.
Honestly, this is getting to be like bloody work: having to proof everything before publication. Just to avoid being inconsistEnt.
Very odd. I’m not sure about the morality of editing someone’s comment just to prove a dubious point.
A few presses of the back button in Firefox, however, does allow me to see what I originally posted. I suppose I will have to start caching these things so I don’t just sound like a sore loser in future. But then, I’m not particularly sure I’m that keen on leaving any further comments if that is your policy on editing comments.