Duress and Undue Influence

HideShow resource information
Duress as to the Person
Barton v Armstrong [1976] - Has very narrow limits, requirement of actual or threatened violence
1 of 13
Duress as to Goods
Pao on v Yiu Long [1980] - Allows economic duress but the threat must be illegitimate and constitutes a significant part of why the contract was entered
2 of 13
Economic Duress
DSNO Subsea v Petroelum ASA [2000] - The threat must be unlawful or illegitimate leaving no reasonable alternative other than (e.g paying extra)
3 of 13
Establishing a Duress Claim
R v AG [2003] - Lord Hoffman - 1. C must show pressure of improper nature was applied or harm was threatened 2. Pressure objectively asses gave C no reasonable alternative 3. The pressure caused C to act as D wanted
4 of 13
Causal Impact of the Pressure
Dimskall Shipping [1992] per Lord Goff- "Pressure must be "significant cause of inducing the plaintiff into entering the relevant contract"
5 of 13
Three Considerations on Causal Impact of Pressure
1. Is there a realistic alternative? 2. Did C Protest at the time? 3. Did C affirm contract? (If so loses right to set aside) Atlantic Baron [1979]
6 of 13
Actual Undue Influence
1. C must show actual influence exists 2. C must show UI was exercised 3. C must show contract exists due to the UI - & - CIBC Mortgages v Pitt [1994] - manifest disadvantage is not required in cases of actual undue influence.
7 of 13
Presumed Undue Influence
Etridge v RBS plc [2001] - 3 Elements Required to prove: 1. Relationship of Trust and Confidence 2. Something which calls for an explanation 3. Can the presumption of UI be rebutted?
8 of 13
PUI - Relationship of Trust and Confidence Classes
Class 2A - (guardian&ward/Solicitor&Client/Trustee/Beneficiary&ReligiousAdvisor/Disciple) holds presumption one party influences another and C only has to show relationship exists. Class 2B: C has to prove relationship of T&C exists
9 of 13
PUI - Something which Calls for an Explanation
Allcard v Skinner [1887] - "the gift must've been so large as not to be reasonably accounted for on the ground of friendship, relationship, charity or other ordinary motives on which ordinary men act"
10 of 13
PUI - Can the Presumption be Rebutted?
Hammond v Osborn [2002] - Normal manner is through showing independent advice has been taken (but it must've been acted on per Etridge)
11 of 13
Third Parties in Undue Influence
Banks which suspect UI, must take reasonable steps to satisfy themselves there is none, they do not have to meet D but must know C has seen a solicitor (Etridge)
12 of 13
Undue Influence Remedies and Exceptions
Rescission & Exceptions: 1. Affirmation of Contract 2. Bona Fide TP with no knowledge of UI means no recovering goods, only receiving compensation
13 of 13

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Duress as to Goods

Back

Pao on v Yiu Long [1980] - Allows economic duress but the threat must be illegitimate and constitutes a significant part of why the contract was entered

Card 3

Front

Economic Duress

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Establishing a Duress Claim

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Causal Impact of the Pressure

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract Law resources »