Mindmap
Duress
Inhalt der Mindmap
Duress
One party alleges that they only entered a contract due to illegitimate pressure from the other party, resulting in a compulsion of the will
- Physical Duress
- Barton v Armstrong
- C paid D £320,000 to remove D from the board of directors
- C only paid this money, partly because commercial reasons, and partly because D threatened to murder him if he didn't
- Held that C only entered the agreement because of the threat, and therefore the contract was void under duress
- C only paid this money, partly because commercial reasons, and partly because D threatened to murder him if he didn't
- C paid D £320,000 to remove D from the board of directors
- Barton v Armstrong
- Duress of Goods
- One party retains the goods of another until payment is made
- Skeate v Beale
- Landlord took the belongings of a tenant due to unpaid rent
- Reached an agreement where the tenant would pay extra to recover his belongings
- Court held that the agreement couldn't be set aside for duress
- Reached an agreement where the tenant would pay extra to recover his belongings
- Landlord took the belongings of a tenant due to unpaid rent
- The Alev
- C's ship carried a cargo of steel, but the charters defaulted on payment
- Meanwhile, the charterers passed the steel to D
- C told D that unless they paid the sum owed by the charterers, they wouldn't receive their cargo
- Court held that the agreement could be avoided under the duress of goods
- C's ship carried a cargo of steel, but the charters defaulted on payment
- Economic Duress
- Illegitimate commercial pressure, usually resulting in catastrophic financial consequences
- Requirements
- Protest
- No alternative
- Seeked advice
- Took steps to avoid
- Requirements
- D&C Builders v Rees
- P worked for D, D owed P money, but offered only 60% as P was in financial difficulty
- P accepted, later tried to recover remaining 40%
- P successfully recovered remaining 40% due to economic duress
- P worked for D, D owed P money, but offered only 60% as P was in financial difficulty
- The Atlantic Baron
- D was a shipbuilder, agreed to build tanker for C, paid in 5 instalments of US$
- First instalment was paid, but by then the value of the $ decreased by 10%, so D refused to continue building
- C were anxious that they would lose a lucrative contract with Shell, so agreed to pay extra
- Once the ship was delivered, C sued D for return of the 10%
- Court held that the threat to terminate the contract amounted to economic duress, but rescission wasn't available because they made the final payments w/out protest
- First instalment was paid, but by then the value of the $ decreased by 10%, so D refused to continue building
- D was a shipbuilder, agreed to build tanker for C, paid in 5 instalments of US$
- The Universe Sentinel
- C's ship was boycotted by the union, D, so in order to get the ship released C paid extra
- D admitted economic duress's said they were protected by the Trade Union Labour Relations Act 1974
- Held the act didn't protect the union, as there was a compulsion of the will and illegitimate pressure
- C's ship was boycotted by the union, D, so in order to get the ship released C paid extra
- Illegitimate commercial pressure, usually resulting in catastrophic financial consequences
- Physical Duress
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- Contract Law Mindmap am Duress, erstellt von Ryan Brace am 19/05/2019.
- Erstellt von
- Ryan Brace
- Aufrufe
- 0
- Bewertung