Duress Flashcards
(13 cards)
A university is organising a graduation party and contracts with a photographer to take polaroid (instant) photographs at the party to give to the students. On the afternoon of the graduation party, the photographer demands more money because he underestimated how many rolls of film would be needed to get footage of everyone. The university agrees without protesting and pays the money upfront.
It is now the day after the party and the university wants to know if it can sue to recover the extra payment that it made on the basis that the agreement is tainted by duress.
Which of the following is the best advice to give as to the application of the principles of duress to this situation?
(a) As the photographer asked for the extra payment rather than the university offering to pay more, it is likely that the amount can be recovered.
(b) As the university would not have paid the extra amount unless the photographer asked, the “but for” test has been satisfied and the university is likely to recover the amount.
(c) As the university paid the money without protesting, it is unlikely that the amount can be claimed back as it will be difficult to show that duress was exerted.
(d) As the university had a lack of practical choice as to whether to pay the extra money, it is likely that it will be able to recover the amount.
(e) As the university is taking immediate steps to recover the amount, it is likely that the amount can be claimed back.
(c) As the university paid the money without protesting, it is unlikely that the amount can be claimed back as it will be difficult to show that duress was exerted.
As the university paid the money without protesting, it is unlikely that the amount can be claimed back as it will be difficult to show that duress was exerted. The other answers seem plausible but are not correct. Whilst taking immediate steps after the duress lifts is a requirement there are other considerations to bear in mind for Dyson’s test in DSND to be satisfied. Whilst the university had a lack of practical choice, there are other considerations to bear in mind for Dyson’s test in DSND to be satisfied, it is not enough by itself. The university has not shown a threatened breach of contract so it is unlikely that the court will find illegitimate pressure which means there is no significant cause (Huyton SA v Peter Cremer 1999). Whilst it is a consideration that the photographer asked for the extra payment rather than the university offering to pay more, the crucial point to consider is whether Dyson J’s test in DSND has been satisfied on the facts, which it likely hasn’t.
What is the causation test for duress to the person?
(a) The duress need be only one factor influencing the victim’s decision to enter the contract
(b) The duress must be the only factor influencing the victim’s decision to enter the contract
(c) The duress must be a significant cause influencing the victim’s decision to enter the contract
(d) The duress must be a serious factor influencing the victim’s decision to enter the contract
(a) The duress need be only one factor influencing the victim’s decision to enter the contract
There may be many reasons why the victim entered into the contract – the actual or threat of violence need only be one of the reasons.
In which case was the current definition of economic duress first set out?
(a) Carillion Construction Ltd v Felix (UK)
(b) DSND Subsea Ltd v Petroleum Geo Services ASA
(c) Barton v Armstrong
(d) Occidental Worldwide Investment Corporation v Skibs A/S Avanti (The Siboen and The Sibotre)
(b) DSND Subsea Ltd v Petroleum Geo Services ASA
Mr Justice Dyson stated that: ‘The ingredients of an actionable duress are that there must be pressure, (a) whose practical effect is that there is compulsion on, or a lack of practical choice, for the victim, (b) which is illegitimate, and (c) which is a significant cause inducing the claimant to enter into the contract…’
What is the legal effect of duress on a contract?
(a) The contract is barred
(b) The contract is affirmed
(c) The contract is void
(d) The contract is voidable
(d) The contract is voidable
The contract is formed and remains in force, but the victim of the duress may take action to have the contract set aside.
What is the causation test for economic duress?
(a) The illegitimate pressure contributed to the making of the agreement
(b) The illegitimate pressure is one factor that caused the making of the agreement
(c) The illegitimate pressure must have been decisive in the making of the agreement
(d) The illegitimate pressure might have caused the making of the agreement
(c) The illegitimate pressure must have been decisive in the making of the agreement
The illegitimate pressure must have been decisive in the making of the contract, in other words, ‘but for’ the pressure, the victim would not have entered into the contract
What key principle was established in the case of Huyton SA v Peter Cremer GmbH & Co?
(a) Fresh consideration is required for a valid variation agreement
(b) That the victim of duress must take prompt action to set aside the contract once the pressure has ceased
(c) That the causation test for economic duress is the ‘but for’ test
(d) That a contract entered into as a result of duress is voidable
(c) That the causation test for economic duress is the ‘but for’ test
The duress must be a significant cause of the victim entering into the contract, in other words, ‘but for’ the illegitimate pressure, the victim would not have entered into the contract
Which of the following is a factor for establishing economic duress?
(a) A lack of practical choice for the party subjected to duress
(b) A false representation inducing the decision to vary the contract
(a) A lack of practical choice for the party subjected to duress
this is one of the factors outlined by Dyson J in the leading test for duress, DSND Subsea v Petroleum Geo Services.
Carillion v Felix
In the case of Carillion v Felix, Carillion had no viable alternative but to agree to Felix’s demand. Which one of the following was NOT one of the circumstances giving rise to Carillion’s lack of practical choice?
(a) Carillion had insufficient time to find an alternative subcontractor to replace Felix.
(b) Carillion had insufficient time to pursue legal action.
(c) If they did not complete the main contract on time Carillion would lose out on a future contract with the main contractor.
(d) If they did not complete the main contract on time, Carillion would incur late fees in the main contract.
(c) If they did not complete the main contract on time Carillion would lose out on a future contract with the main contractor.
Carillion v Felix
Felix’s threat to Carillion was made in:
(a) Bad faith
(b) Good faith
(a) Bad faith
Felix’s threatened breach of contract was an unlawful threat in bad faith.
Carillion v Felix
The effect of the economic duress exerted by Felix was to render the variation of contract between Carillion and Felix:
(a) Voidable
(b) Void
(a) Voidable
A and B have a contract. A offers B more money to perform an existing contractual obligation. When does B provide legal consideration in return for the promise of extra payment?
(a) B provides A with a practical benefit.
(b) B exceeds their contractual obligation to A.
(b) B exceeds their contractual obligation to A.
In the case of Williams v Roffey did Williams exert duress to bring about Roffey’s promise to pay more?
(a) No
(b) Yes
(a) No
The absence of duress was an element of Glidewell LJ’s test in Williams v Roffey which was satisfied in this case.
The modern trend is to take a more creative approach when assessing whether consideration for a variation is present and instead test the validity of the renegotiation through the doctrine of economic duress.
(a) False
(b) True
(b) True
