The Element of Wrongful Pressure in a Finding of Duress

Authors

  • Nicholas Rafferty

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29173/alr2197

Abstract

The author expounds and criticizes the traditional notion that, in a claim for restitution based on duress, it must be shown that the victim was threatened with some unlawful action. After setting forth the common law development of duress, including comparisons between American and Commonwealth jurisprudence, the author argues that on occasion courts have shown a willingness to abandon the traditional view of what type of act must constitute wrongful pressure. In particular, some American courts have adopted a more flexible approach, using as a test of wrongful pressure, not the unlawfulness of the threatened act, but rather the coercive motive of the oppressor. Finally, the author discusses the possibility that duress could be extended to cover the situation where the threat involved is a denial of future contracts.

Downloads

Published

1980-03-01

Issue

Vol 18, No 3

Section

Articles

License

For Editions following and including Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License

For Editions prior to Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

Author(s) retain original copyright in the substantive content of the titled work, subject to the following rights that are granted indefinitely:

  1. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to produce, publish, disseminate, and distribute the titled work in electronic format to online database services, including, but not limited to: LexisNexis, QuickLaw, HeinOnline, and EBSCO;
  2. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to post the titled work on the Alberta Law Review website and/or related websites.
  3. Author(s) agree that the titled work may be used for educational or instructional purposes and/or in educational or instructional materials. The author(s) acknowledge that the titled work is subject to other such "fair dealing" provisions and applicable legislation.
  4. Author(s) grant a limited license to those accessing the titled work from an electronic database or an Alberta Law Review website to download the titled work onto their computer and to print a copy for their own personal, non-commercial use, subject to proper attribution.

To use the journal's content elsewhere, permission must be obtained from the author(s) and the Alberta Law Review.