Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

Haven't read the judgement yet, but I have had a very similar case myself in the recent past. Good guidance can be found in Griffin v Kingsmill and Barder v Caluori; to set aside a settlement is rare and the following points must be established:

i. The change in facts means that the settlement is manifestly unfair; provided that
ii. The change relates to matters that were the subject of a common assumption between the parties; and that
iii. The change was not foreseeable or “reasonably taken into account as a significant factor”
iv. The change occurs within a short period of the order (a year is thought to be getting towards the limit)
v. The party seeking to set aside the order acts promptly once he knows of the change
vi. The parties rights will not be adversely affected if the damages figure is revised.

I advised my client not to go ahead as that particular case would not have satisfied the criteria.

Your details

Cancel