Carroll v Kynaston

Carroll v Kynaston

The claimant cannot recover costs as damages for breach of settlement agreement where such costs could have been awarded in the original action and were not; the judge's order of 'no order as to costs' is final. Delay in contempt proceedings did not preclude committal given the explanation and public interest in restraining harassment.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Carroll; Respondent: Christine Kynaston
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreements, Costs as Damages, Committal for Contempt, Harassment Injunctions
Civil Procedure Contract Law Costs Contempt of Court Settlement Agreements Costs as Damages Committal for Contempt Harassment Injunctions

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Carroll

Appellant

Christine Kynaston

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs incurred in prior proceedings can be recovered as damages for breach of settlement agreement
  2. 2 Whether delay in bringing contempt proceedings precludes committal
  3. 3 Proper construction and effect of the settlement agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant cannot recover costs as damages for breach of settlement agreement where such costs could have been awarded in the original action and were not; the judge's order of 'no order as to costs' is final. Delay in contempt proceedings did not preclude committal given the explanation and public interest in restraining harassment.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed in all respects
  • No damages for costs as breach of settlement agreement