Kerridge v Simmonds [1906] HCA 66

Kerridge v Simmonds [1906] HCA 66

The law permits compromise of offences which are not of public concern and where the injured party may sue for damages. The agreement between the parties to withdraw a private defamation prosecution, supported by consideration, was valid and not void for uncertainty or public policy.

Parties
Appellant; Defendant: Kerridge; Respondent; Plaintiff: Simmonds
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 October 1906
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Compromise of Prosecution, Public Policy, Enforceability of Agreements, Uncertainty in Contract Terms, Defamation
Contract Law Criminal Law Tort Law Compromise of Prosecution Public Policy Enforceability of Agreements Uncertainty in Contract Terms Defamation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerridge

Appellant; Defendant

Simmonds

Respondent; Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an agreement to pay money in consideration of withdrawing a prosecution for defamation is void for public policy as stifling a prosecution
  2. 2 Whether the agreement is void for uncertainty regarding duration of payments

Ratio Decidendi

The law permits compromise of offences which are not of public concern and where the injured party may sue for damages. The agreement between the parties to withdraw a private defamation prosecution, supported by consideration, was valid and not void for uncertainty or public policy.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.