Simantob v Shavleyan

Simantob v Shavleyan

Forbearance to pursue a defence that was reasonably arguable at the time of the agreement, even if later found to be unmeritorious, constitutes good consideration for a contract variation; thus, the April/May 2014 variation agreement was supported by valid consideration and is enforceable.

Parties
Appellant: Dan Simantob; Respondent: Yacob Shavleyan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Consideration, Variation of Contract, Compromise of Claims, Penalty Clauses, Summary Judgment
Contract Law Commercial Law Consideration Variation of Contract Compromise of Claims Penalty Clauses Summary Judgment

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 18
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dan Simantob

Appellant

Yacob Shavleyan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether forbearance to raise a defence later found to be without legal merit can constitute sufficient consideration to support a contract variation
  2. 2 Whether the April/May 2014 variation agreement was supported by good consideration
  3. 3 Whether the $1,000 per day clause was a penalty

Ratio Decidendi

Forbearance to pursue a defence that was reasonably arguable at the time of the agreement, even if later found to be unmeritorious, constitutes good consideration for a contract variation; thus, the April/May 2014 variation agreement was supported by valid consideration and is enforceable.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed