Chapter 18 Self-test questions

. Duress cases are typically identifiable by the presence of three particular elements. Which of the following elements are currently essential to a finding of basic duress? Select all that apply.

A lack of consideration on the part of the perpetrator

Unfairness of the terms of the contract

A lack of consent on the part of the victim of the alleged duress

Illegitimate threats on the part of the perpetrator

. Consider the two following cases:

a - X pawns his watch with Y pawnbrokers for £50. He returns a year later and is told by Y that he must pay an extra £30 in interest to have his watch returned (the interest payable under the terms of the contract is only £10); otherwise Y will not return the watch and will put it up for sale. X eventually pays the extra money because he needs his watch back. Soon afterwards he brings an action to recover the excess £20 paid.

b - X pawns his watch with Y pawnbrokers for £50. He returns a year later and is told by Y that he must pay an extra £30 in interest to have his watch returned (the interest payable under the terms of the contract is only £10); otherwise Y will not return the watch and will put it up for sale. X makes a deal with Y to pay £10 now and the remaining £20 in four monthly instalments in exchange for the immediate return of his watch. X fails to pay the four additional instalments. Y sues to recover the outstanding amount.

According to the (now overruled) case of Skeate v. Beale (1841) 11 Ad & E 983, will X succeed in his claim in (a) and his defence in (b)?

Only in (a)

Only in (b)

In both (a) and (b)

In neither

. North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v. Hyundai Construction Co Ltd (The Atlantic Baron) [1979] QB 705 illustrates the need for a claimant to act quickly once he is free from duress in order to ensure a remedy. What reasoning lies behind this ruling?

Given sufficient time, a perpetrator of duress is likely to leave the country

It would be unfair on the defendant to set aside the contract at such a late date

The need to ensure that the contract is set aside within the limitation period

In the case of a voidable contract, an affirmation removes the right to set aside the contract

. It is generally accepted that, in duress cases, it suffices for the party subject to the duress to show that the threats were a reason which induced him to enter into the contract; the threats do not have to be the reason or even a principal reason. True or false?

True - in the case of economic duress

True - in the case of duress to the person

Never true

. English law has refused to recognise a doctrine of lawful act duress. True or false?

True

False

Quiz Content