With thanks to Nicholas Bentley for drawing my attention to JMW1 v Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust [2020] NSWSC 1682, available on Caselaw.
The plaintiff, self represented, sued the Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust (“the Salvation Army”) for damages for sexual assault which occurred whilst the plaintiff, as a young boy, lived at the Bexley Boys’ Home, a residential care institution for children conducted by the Salvation Army.
The defence filed by the Salvation Army included as a response to the claim a 2014 Deed to which the plaintiff and the Salvation Army were parties. Under that Deed a sum of money was paid to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was represented by a lawyer at the time.
In a reply to the defence the plaintiff made a number of assertions including that he did not have any understanding of the Deed and that he believed that his signing of the Deed was no more than an acknowledgement for the payment of moneys as part of a ‘restorative justice’ meeting.
The Salvation Army asked the Court to determine as a separate question the whether the Deed operated as a bar to the plaintiff pursuing his claim.
Upon consideration of the evidence the Court rejected the submission that the plaintiff’s entry into the Deed was in any way the result of any duress being placed upon him by his solicitor (at [113]). The plaintiff had not established that he was mistaken about the settlement (at [115]).
The Court held that the Deed of Release entered into by the plaintiff and the defendant was valid and binding. It operated to prevent the plaintiff from pursuing the present proceedings, and claiming the relief sought.