Contract Law

2179 Words5 Pages

Contract Law The law of contract recognises that an agreement is dependent on consent and this, therefore, implies that an agreement obtained by threats or undue persuasion will be insufficient. Many contracts in practise involve a degree of 'arm twisting' and this raises the question as to what level of pressure is acceptable to exert over another contracting party? This problem is dealt with by the common law doctrine of duress and the equitable doctrine of undue influence. The courts have developed these doctrines over a long period of time and since the Judicature Act 1873 it has been the duty of all courts to administer both doctrines concurrently. Both common law and equity agree that a party cannot be held to a contract unless he is a 'free agent'. A party who is subject to duress or undue influence is said to have had his will 'overborne' so that he is incapable of making a free choice or even acting voluntarily. It has been argued that the way in which these doctrines have been developed has meant that not enough importance is placed on whether the contract is fair or not. It is the aim of this essay to analyse the development in the law of duress and undue influence and determine the validity of this argument. The common law doctrine of duress allows a party to avoid any promise extorted from him by terror or violence. A contract that has been made under such circumstances is said to have been made under duress. If duress is established it has the effect of rendering the contract voidable. As mentioned previously, agreement in the law of contract depends upon consent. The juristic basis for duress is that agreement obt... ... middle of paper ... ...[1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep 293 [13] North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Hyundai Construction Co Ltd [1979] QB 705 [14] Atlas Express Ltd v Kafco (Importers and Distribution) Ltd [1989] QB 833 [15] CTN Cash and Carry Ltd v Gallaher Ltd [1994] 4 All ER 714 [16] Pao On v Lau Yiu Long [1979] QB 705 [17] Tate v Williamson [1866] 2 Ch App 55 [18] Allcard v Skinner [1877] 36 Ch D 145 [19] Inche Noriah v Shaik Allie Bin Omar [1929] AC 127 [20] Lloyds Bank v Bundy [1975] QB 326 [21] National Westminster v Morgan [1985] 1 All ER 821 [22] Goldsworthy v Brickell [1987] Ch 378 [23] BCCI v Aboody [1990] [24] Barclays Bank v O'Brien [1993] 4 All ER 417 [25] CIBC v Pitt [1993] 4 All ER 433 [26] Massey v Midland Bank [1995] 1 All ER 929 [27] Banco Exterieur Internacionale v Mann [1995] 1 All ER 936

Open Document