Priory Caring Services Ltd v Capita Property Services Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 226 (11 March 2010)
The release agreement, on its proper construction and in light of the factual matrix, was a wide release covering all claims, whether present or future, known or unknown, arising out of Capita's appointment as surveyors to Priory in relation to the Priory Hotel. The parties were aware of concerns about Mr Owen's negligence and contemplated the possibility of claims arising from his conduct. There was no basis to limit the release to known claims or to disputes about fees or a separate retainer. Consideration was provided. No procedural unfairness or admissible new evidence justified disturbing the judgment below.
- Citation
- [2010] EWCA Civ 226
- Parties
- Appellant / Claimant: Priory Caring Services Limited; Respondent / Defendant: Capita Property Services Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 11 March 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order Striking Out Claim at Preliminary Issue
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Release and Settlement Agreements, Negligence, Construction Disputes, Interpretation of Contracts, Limitation of Actions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Priory Caring Services Limited
Appellant / Claimant
Capita Property Services Ltd
Respondent / Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order Striking Out Claim at Preliminary Issue
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a release agreement barred the claimant's negligence claim against the defendant
- 2 Proper construction of the release agreement—whether it covered unknown claims
- 3 Whether consideration was provided for the release
Ratio Decidendi
The release agreement, on its proper construction and in light of the factual matrix, was a wide release covering all claims, whether present or future, known or unknown, arising out of Capita's appointment as surveyors to Priory in relation to the Priory Hotel. The parties were aware of concerns about Mr Owen's negligence and contemplated the possibility of claims arising from his conduct. There was no basis to limit the release to known claims or to disputes about fees or a separate retainer. Consideration was provided. No procedural unfairness or admissible new evidence justified disturbing the judgment below.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Application to adduce new evidence refused
- Application to amend grounds of appeal refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment