Variation Of A Settlement Agreement

In the recent case of Simantob v Shavleyan (t/a Yacob`s Gallery) [2018] EWHC 2005 (QB) (3. (Kerr J), the parties were art dealers and had settled claims related to a dispute over the sale of ancient Islamic art by entering into a settlement agreement in which the debtor accepted a total and final settlement amount of $1.5 million. The agreement provided that in the event of default, the debtor would pay an additional $1,000 per day. Over several years, Mr. Shavleyan made payments to Mr. Simantob for a total of $1.1 million, leaving $400,000 of unpaid debt and more than $1 million in accrued interest. The debtor then fell behind and the parties entered into a separate oral agreement in 2014, the exact nature of which was disputed. There are several reasons to apply for variation, including, but not limited to fraud, undue influence or undue pressure to sign or accept certain provisions. In Gollach – Gomperts v Universal Mills and Produce Co 1978 (1) SA 914 (AD) at 922 C-H, it was found that a reasonable error by one of the parties could be relied upon as a valid reason for variation or resignation. Many contracts and transaction agreements have “non-variation clauses. This would suggest that no variation in the terms it contains is possible, but in Shifren, among others, against SA Sentrale Ko-op Graanmaatskappy Bpk 1964 (2) SA 343 (O), it was expressly stipulated that variations can be sought, but this must be done in writing.

Second, the role of the courts would extend to functions such as debt collection and the registration of an unnecessary and indeterminate number of agreements if the courts were competent to make judicial decisions prior to the opening of a dispute between the parties. The Tribunal`s jurisdiction would extend beyond all issues that the parties may bring before the courts. Another consequence is the seriousness of the failure to comply with a court decision, which would be linked in the same way to a transaction agreement (or agreement) that rendered a court decision before the parties to the agreement opened legal proceedings.