Issues arising on the implementation of a binding Shareholders Settlement Agreement lead to High Court proceedings
A dispute among siblings in respect of shares in the family cinema business resulted in the recent High Court decision of Kennedy & Others v Ward  IEHC 158. The case provides an illustration of common pitfalls to be avoided when entering into a settlement agreement, that will be of interest to parties to commercial agreements generally.
In this case, parties to the dispute signed a settlement agreement late at night which provided that the plaintiffs would transfer their shares in the family business to the defendant in return for cash consideration totalling €31.5m to be paid in instalments on certain dates. When the conduct of the parties departed from what was agreed, the parties asked the Court to interpret various provisions of the agreement. By way of summary, the Court held that parties to agreements must ensure that their intentions are fully reflected when entering into a settlement agreement. The Court will be very reluctant to impute terms where an express agreement among parties is negotiated with legal advisers involved.
This ALG Soundbite provides information on the High Court case of Kennedy & Others v Ward  IEHC 158 and the issues that can arise when parties seek to implement a settlement agreement. It discusses how the court will be reluctant to interfere with a settlement agreement that has been negotiated with the benefit of legal advice. Listen to an overview from Knowledge Lawyers Michelle McLoughlin and Liam Murphy.
For further information on this topic please contact Michelle McLoughlin and Liam Murphy, Knowledge Lawyers or any member of ALG's Corporate and M&A team.
Date published: 23 June 2022