Mooney v Trustees of the Christian Brothers [2025] VSC 602 (Link to JADE).
In July 2016, the plaintiff accepted an offer of settlement from the defendant, the Trustees of the Christian Brothers, for the sum of $150,000 inclusive of costs and disbursements and signed a settlement agreement.
This matter concerned an application by the plaintiff, made pursuant to s 27QD of the Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic) to have the deed set aside, so as to enable him to recover further compensation from the defendant.
The court held that only part of the deed should be set aside, such that the plaintiff is not barred from claiming further damages in this proceeding, save for in relation to his economic loss. The court said at [126]:
Considering the whole of the evidence, I am satisfied that the plaintiff did understand he was voluntarily accepting settlement monies for his general damages and medical expenses only, and that he was expressly giving up his right to claim economic loss. I am not persuaded that the plaintiff’s decision to give up that aspect of his claim was related to the Ellis defence (or any other legal barriers associated with suing the Christian Brothers). Rather, it is consistent with the speculative nature of such a claim, and the paucity of evidence to support it. Accordingly, the plaintiff has failed to satisfy me it is just and reasonable to set aside clause 2.2.4 of the deed.
[BillMaddensWordpress #2436]