The defendant, Impark, brought a motion to enforce an interim settlement agreement regarding the remittance of parking lot revenues by the plaintiff, Precise.
The dispute centered on whether the settlement agreement's fee deduction arrangement applied retroactively to the months of September and October 2012.
The court applied principles of contractual interpretation, considering the factual matrix and the specific language used in the agreement.
The court concluded that the future-looking language and the reference to Precise altering its 'current practice' indicated the parties intended the arrangement to apply prospectively from November onwards.
The motion was dismissed.