Duress under English law

Case Law Examples:
English contract law has seen several notable cases involving the principle of duress. One such case is Universe Tankships Inc. of Monrovia v International Transport Workers' Federation (The Universe Sentinel) [1983], where economic duress was established when a trade union applied pressure to a shipping company. The court held that the threat of industrial action constituted economic duress, rendering the contract voidable.
Another significant case is Pao On v Lau Yiu Long [1980], which established the "pressure point" test. According to this test, the party claiming duress must show that they had been subjected to pressure that they could not reasonably resist. The test emphasizes the absence of reasonable alternatives and the victim's lack of independent advice.
Conclusion:
The principle of duress plays a crucial role in English contract law, protecting parties from entering into contracts against their free will. To establish duress, the party claiming it must demonstrate the presence of an illegitimate threat, coercion, and the absence of reasonable alternatives. If duress is proven, the coerced party has the right to rescind the contract and may be entitled to damages. However, there are limitations and defenses that can affect the outcome of a duress claim. It is essential for individuals to understand their rights and seek legal advice when faced with circumstances involving duress in contractual relationships.


Certainly! Here's some additional information on the principle of duress under English Contract law:
Economic Duress:
Economic duress is a form of duress that often arises in commercial contracts. It occurs when one party exploits the economic vulnerability of the other party to gain an unfair advantage. Examples of economic duress include threatening to terminate an existing contract, withholding payment, or imposing unjustified economic pressure.
To establish economic duress, the party claiming duress must demonstrate that the pressure applied was illegitimate, the victim had no reasonable alternative, and the contract was a result of the coercion. However, economic pressure alone, such as tough bargaining or hard economic circumstances, does not necessarily constitute economic duress. The courts consider whether the pressure exerted was oppressive, unconscionable, or amounted to a wrongful exercise of power.