Coercion and undue influence

 Coercion and Undue Influence:

Coercion: 

Coercion involves the use of threats or force to compel someone to enter into a contract against their will. It essentially undermines the free consent of a party. The key elements of coercion include:

1. Threats or Force: Coercion typically involves threats of physical harm, violence, or other forms of duress that instill fear in the victim. This can include threats to harm the person, their family, or their property.
2. Lack of Free Consent: The victim's consent to enter into the contract is obtained involuntarily due to the fear induced by the coercion. They are essentially left with no choice but to agree to the terms of the contract.
3. Voidability of Contract: A contract entered into under coercion is voidable at the option of the coerced party. They have the right to rescind the contract and seek remedies for any losses suffered as a result of the coercion.

Undue Influence: 

Undue influence occurs when one party takes advantage of a position of power or trust to exploit the vulnerability of another party and influence their decision-making. It involves persuasion or manipulation rather than direct threats. The key elements of undue influence include:

1. Dominant Position: The influencing party holds a position of power, authority, or trust over the other party. This can be due to a familial relationship, fiduciary duty, or any other circumstance that gives them significant influence over the vulnerable party.
2. Unfair Persuasion: The influencing party exerts pressure or influence on the vulnerable party to enter into the contract, exploiting their trust or dependence. This can involve excessive persuasion, manipulation, or taking advantage of the vulnerable party's weaknesses.
3. Weakened Consent: The vulnerable party's consent to the contract is weakened or impaired due to the undue influence exerted upon them. They may not fully understand the terms of the contract or may agree to them against their better judgment due to the influence exerted by the other party.
4. Presumption of Undue Influence: In certain relationships, such as those involving trustees, guardians, or caregivers, there is a presumption of undue influence if the influencing party benefits from the transaction. In such cases, the burden of proof shifts to the influencing party to demonstrate that the transaction was fair and equitable.

Key Differences:

1. Nature of Influence: Coercion involves direct threats or force to compel consent, while undue influence relies on persuasion, manipulation, or taking advantage of a position of trust or authority.
2. Type of Consent: In coercion, the victim's consent is obtained involuntarily due to fear or duress, while in undue influence, the victim's consent may be undermined by unfair persuasion or exploitation of vulnerabilities.
3. Voidability vs. Presumption: Contracts entered into under coercion are voidable at the option of the coerced party, while in cases of undue influence, there may be a presumption of invalidity, especially in certain relationships where the influencing party benefits from the transaction.

Subscribe on YouTube - NotesWorld

For PDF copy of Solved Assignment

Any University Assignment Solution

WhatsApp - 9113311883 (Paid)