Further, duress includes various levels of turpitude. However, fraud is a serious matter which must be clearly and distinctly proved:ĭerry v Peak. Lord Cross drew analogy with fraudulent misrepresentation when the test is also a reason, not the reason. Surely burden of proof should be on the rogue to show that the other party was not influence by his wrongdoing. Held: enough that A's illegitimate threats were a reason for B entering into the contract,Įven if not a but-for reason. Threatened to kill B - B agreed to but A's share later transpired that B's main reason for entering into the contract was for commercial reasons. A and B then had to work out how to buy out A's share. Power struggle:īarton got rid of Armstrong. Armstrong was the Chairman Barton was MD. In short, duress is not ruled out by knowing and willing consent, but neither is it indicated merely by the presence of (even overwhelming) pressure.įacts: B and A were shareholders of Landmark Corporation in Australia. Absence of choice in this sense does not negate consent in law for this the pressure must be one of a kind which the law does not regard as legitimate'. '… in life… many acts are done under pressure, sometimes overwhelming pressure, so that one can say that the actor had no choice but to act. I may have 'no choice' but to agree to the interest rate set by the lender, or to the prices charged for the food, shelter, or clothing that I 'need', but such ordinary pressures will not excuse me from my contractual responsibilities. Valid consent does not require freedom from pressures. On the other hand, actionable duress is not merely about consenting under pressure, however strong. The real objection is not that I did not consent, but that you induced my consent by illegitimate pressure the complaint is the nature and acceptability of the choices the victim is left with. Know what I am agreeing to, I intend to agree, and I very much want to agree. If you yell me to 'hand over £10,000 or be horribly maimed', my decision to hand over the money is very real indeed. He points out that a victim of duress submits knowingly and intentionally. Is the current law on duress satisfactory? If not, how might it be developed in the future?Īlthough duress was originally explained in terms of the victim's will being overborne and his or her consent vitiated this is now recognised is inadequate.Ītiyah argues that contract law should follow criminal law's rejection of the What is the justification for the duress doctrine? How much pressure must the illegitimate threat exert on the other party? What sorts of pressures are regarded illegitimate by the law? The questions to be addressed are the following: There are four categories of actionable duress: whilst the law on duress to the person and to the property is relatively settled, the precise contours of the newer categories of economic duress and lawful act duress are still unclear.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |