Re: The law on contracts and agreements advice wanted please
- From: "foaddoc" <foad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 06:58:20 -0400
"Ian" <sum1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20070406.0145.439snz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Advice on this, anyone:
Someone on a n/group said that if a contract was "unreasonable" it was
'probably unenforceable'. I argued that if you put your signature to a
contract, you cannot go to law and ask for it to be voided or cancelled,
unless of course you are mentally incompetent or had signed under duress
or something.
So a third party chips in and claims that there are loads of cases of
contracts being annulled, and referring to some web site or other about
for example thousands of contracts being voided in the infamous Nigerian
scam that everyone receives on e-mail, and that if
the victim had signed because he was desperate for money or the like,
that was signing under duress.
Who's more or less right here, d'you think?
(The thread can be found on alt.books.ghost-fiction,
Subject: Contracts.)
--
Ian
Generally speaking unconscionable contracts are unenforceable.
17A Am Jur 2d CONTRACTS § 279
§ 279 Situations where agreements are unconscionable
A determination whether a contract is unconscionable depends upon all the
facts and circumstances of a particular case.1 The courts have held that a
contract may be held invalid or will not be enforced if --
-- the contract would bring about an unreasonable restriction of the liberty
of a person to exercise his or her calling or a living.2
-- the contract is one that no person in his or her senses and not under
delusion would make on the one hand and that no honest and fair person would
accept on the other.3
-- the inequality is so strong and manifest as to shock the conscience and
confound the judgment of any person of common sense.4
However, a contract may not be found unenforceable and unconscionable
contract where the party opposing enforcement --
-- was experienced.5
-- does not show that the terms of the contract are unreasonably favorable
to the other party or that the absence of choice is sufficient to prove
unconscionability.6
-- does not show that that the parties' relative bargaining power was so
unequal as to make the clause at issue unconscionable.7
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: using craigslist to vandalise indirectly; who is responsible?
- Next by Date: Credit Card Problem
- Previous by thread: The law on contracts and agreements advice wanted please
- Next by thread: Re: The law on contracts and agreements advice wanted please
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
