Abdullah Nasser Bin Obaid & Ors v RLS Solicitors Limited (trading as RLS Law)
[2024] EWHC 1899 (Ch)
Abdullah Nasser Bin Obaid & Ors v Khalid Abdullah Al-Hezaimi & Ors
7 June 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 612
Court of Appeal
Two businessmen settled a UK lawsuit. Later, one sued the other in Saudi Arabia. The UK court decided the settlement only covered issues from the original UK case, not the new Saudi case, because the two cases involved different issues.
Key Facts
- •Dispute between Abdullah Bin Obaid and Khalid Al-Hezaimi regarding the construction of a settlement deed.
- •2017 English High Court proceedings settled by a deed dated 19 June 2019.
- •Subsequent claims in Saudi Arabia in 2019 by Bin Obaid against Al-Hezaimi.
- •Al-Hezaimi argued the Saudi claims were released by the Settlement Deed.
- •Bin Obaid sought a declaration that the Saudi claims were not released.
- •The High Court agreed with Bin Obaid.
- •Al-Hezaimi appealed.
Legal Principles
Contractual interpretation is determined by the reasonable objective reader, considering the background knowledge available to the parties.
This is not explicitly named but is standard UK contractual interpretation.
A general release aims to 'wipe the slate clean', while a release of particular claims does not necessarily cover all related matters.
Bank of Credit and Commercial International SA v Ali [2001] UKHL 8, [2002] 1 AC 251
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Court of Appeal held that the Settlement Deed only released claims arising out of or connected with the matters litigated in the 2017 English proceedings, as identified by the claims and counterclaims made and defenses advanced in those proceedings. The Saudi claims, based on loans, were not considered connected to the 2017 proceedings, which focused on beneficial ownership of properties and related funds.
Declaration that the Settlement Deed did not release claims related to certain payments in the 2019 Saudi proceedings.
These payments, while initially included in the 2017 proceedings, were subsequently removed. The court clarified that the subsequent claims in Saudi Arabia regarding the nature of these payments (as loans) did not arise from or connect to the central issues of the 2017 English proceedings.