DURESS
Lecture Notes
Elements of Contract Law
Law - Year One
, Duress - Lecture Notes
_______________________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
With the completion of the elements of a contract, now it will be looked into what happens during the negotiating
process of the contract. One of the events that could occur during this period could be that of vitiating elements. These
are, as a result, viewed upon as defective negotiations, rendering a contract voidable.
Definition:
Duress is an element which can vitiate consent and thus render a contract voidable.
Voidable:
➢ Giving the victim the right to end the contract (it is not conclusive that the contract will end, up to the
innocent party’s discretion).
➢ Contract could be made purely void. Some contracts are known as ‘void ab initio’. The term void ab initio,
means "to be treated as invalid from the outset”. This is in relation to illegal goods like that of Marijuana in the
UK. As such, the innocent party cannot bring an action to make the contract voidable because it is indeed void
from the get go itself.
When a contract is voidable, the innocent party will be given the right to end the contract. It is definitely not going to
end but power is given to the victim.
There are three types of duress:
(i) Physical Duress
(ii) Duress of Goods
(iii) Economic Duress
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TYPES OF DURESS: PHYSICAL DURESS
Definition:
Contract agreement initiated by an act of physical violence (threaten).
✓ Barton v. Armstrong (PC 1976) - This is another Australian case which went all the way up to the Privy Council. A
had threatened B by saying that he would murder B if he does not sign the contract.
Issue: The major issue in this case was about causation. Who did the burden of proof (onus) lie on? A (for showing
that the threat did not cause B to enter into the contract) or B (for showing that he did enter into the contract due
to the threat)?
Arguments:
➢ A’s counsel argued that B would have signed the contract with or without the threat and hence agreement
was not caused by the threat.
➢ A’s counsel argued that the threat was meant to be a joke but this line of argument was neither bought by
the plaintiff nor the judges.
Held: Privy council held that the onus (the burden of proof) laid on Armstrong. Physical duress was ultimately
found in the case disagreeing with A’s arguments.
Lecture Notes
Elements of Contract Law
Law - Year One
, Duress - Lecture Notes
_______________________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
With the completion of the elements of a contract, now it will be looked into what happens during the negotiating
process of the contract. One of the events that could occur during this period could be that of vitiating elements. These
are, as a result, viewed upon as defective negotiations, rendering a contract voidable.
Definition:
Duress is an element which can vitiate consent and thus render a contract voidable.
Voidable:
➢ Giving the victim the right to end the contract (it is not conclusive that the contract will end, up to the
innocent party’s discretion).
➢ Contract could be made purely void. Some contracts are known as ‘void ab initio’. The term void ab initio,
means "to be treated as invalid from the outset”. This is in relation to illegal goods like that of Marijuana in the
UK. As such, the innocent party cannot bring an action to make the contract voidable because it is indeed void
from the get go itself.
When a contract is voidable, the innocent party will be given the right to end the contract. It is definitely not going to
end but power is given to the victim.
There are three types of duress:
(i) Physical Duress
(ii) Duress of Goods
(iii) Economic Duress
_______________________________________________________________________________________
TYPES OF DURESS: PHYSICAL DURESS
Definition:
Contract agreement initiated by an act of physical violence (threaten).
✓ Barton v. Armstrong (PC 1976) - This is another Australian case which went all the way up to the Privy Council. A
had threatened B by saying that he would murder B if he does not sign the contract.
Issue: The major issue in this case was about causation. Who did the burden of proof (onus) lie on? A (for showing
that the threat did not cause B to enter into the contract) or B (for showing that he did enter into the contract due
to the threat)?
Arguments:
➢ A’s counsel argued that B would have signed the contract with or without the threat and hence agreement
was not caused by the threat.
➢ A’s counsel argued that the threat was meant to be a joke but this line of argument was neither bought by
the plaintiff nor the judges.
Held: Privy council held that the onus (the burden of proof) laid on Armstrong. Physical duress was ultimately
found in the case disagreeing with A’s arguments.
