“An ordinary civil law can, of course, be effectively compromised, although the facts that lead to the requirement may also constitute a criminal offence. However, in such a case, an agreement to abandon “all judicial proceedings” may be illegal, since the rate is broad enough to cover possible civil and criminal proceedings. The settlement of the action defines the legal requirements of the parties and is often enforced by a court order according to a common provision by the parties. In other cases (such as where the fees have been met by the payment of a certain amount of money), the plaintiff and the defendant can only file the rejection of the proceedings.  In order to circumvent the issue of confidentiality mentioned above, a standard consent order, called “Tomlin-Order,” is issued. The decision itself provides that the claim is suspended and that no further action can be taken in court (except for the referral of a dispute in the execution of the decision to the Tribunal, which is admissible). The order also deals with the payment of fees and payments of money outside when the money is held by the court (since these will be matters that must be dealt with by court decision). However, the actual terms of the transaction are dealt with in a “schedule” of the order, which may remain confidential. Violations of the calendar may be considered a breach of contract or a violation of the consent order.
All attempts to jeopardize liability for private prosecutions should be treated with caution. Court officials, who work for defendants in civil litigation where criminal activity is relevant, would probably be wise to warn their client of the risk that their opponent will later attempt to pursue private prosecutions. Part A could tell Part B that it will resolve a dispute by paying them $100 by December 31. If Party B says they will accept the $100, but by October 30, it will not be an acceptance of Party A`s offer. This is due to the principles of contract law (the offer submitted was not accepted). Therefore, Part B would have made a “counter-offer.” If the parties do not properly document this comparison, there may be confusion as to the obligations of the parties (particularly with respect to the amount of payment of the transaction). Most accounts are confidential. In these cases, the court order may relate to another document that is not disclosed, but which may be revealed as evidence of a breach of the transaction.
Confidentiality is not possible in class actions in the United States, where all transactions under Rule 23 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedures and the rules of purpose adopted in most states are subject to Court approval. Even if the lawyers representing the parties have considered the possibility of taking private action, such an agreement risks being considered overwhelming and therefore unenforceable.