A business owner entered into a contract to sell her company after another party threatened to spread false and harmful rumors about her business unless she agreed to the terms. If the business owner later challenges the validity of the contract, which of the following legal doctrines is most likely to render the contract unenforceable?
The doctrine of duress applies when a party is improperly pressured into entering a contract through threats or coercion, such as the threat to spread false and harmful rumors in this case. This undermines the essential element of voluntary agreement required for a valid contract. Though undue influence also involves improper pressure, it typically refers to exploitation of a relationship of trust or confidence to dominate another party's decision-making. Misrepresentation, on the other hand, involves false statements of fact that induce a party to agree to a contract but is not focused on coercion or threats. Finally, the absence of consideration would involve a failure by one party to provide something of value, which is unrelated to the improper pressure in this scenario.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the legal definition of duress in contract law?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does duress differ from undue influence?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Can a contract formed under duress ever be made valid later?