Powerpoint from textbook Business Law - the ethical, global, and e-commerce environment to accompany BA 330 course at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Learning Objectives
Five doctrines that permit people to
avoid their contracts because of the
absence of real consent:
Misrepresentation
Fraud
Mistake
Duress, and
Undue influence
13 - 4
Contracts induced by mistake, fraud,
misrepresentation, duress, or undue
influence are generally considered to be
voidable
Person claiming non-consent has power to
rescind (cancel) the contract
Person claiming non-consent must not act in a
manner to ratify (affirm) the contract
Effect of The Five Doctrines
13 - 5
A misrepresentation is a false statement and
may be negligent (innocent) or fraudulent
(made with knowledge of falsity and intent
to deceive)
Either way, injured party may void (rescind)
the contract
A person who commits fraud may be liable
in tort for damages, including punitive
damages
Misrepresentation or Fraud?
13 - 6
Innocent or fraudulent misrepresentation:
Defendant made an untrue assertion of fact
Includes active concealment or non-disclosure
Fact asserted was material or was fraudulent
Fact is material if likely to play significant role in
inducing reasonable person to enter the contract
Complaining party entered the contract
because of reliance on the assertion
Elements
13 - 7
Reliance of complainant
was reasonable
Reliance means that
person entered the
contract because of
belief in the assertion
Fifth element for fraud:
Injury
Elements (cont.)
13 - 8
Remedies
13 - 9
Jordan v. Knafel
Facts:
Knafel claimed she was pregnant with
Jordan’s child and Jordan offered a settlement:
Knafel agreed to keep the situation confidential
and to refrain from filing a paternity suit
Jordan would pay Knafel $5 million upon his
retirement from professional basketball
After child’s birth, paternity test revealed
child was not Jordan’s
13 - 10
Jordan v. Knafel
Procedural History & Issue:
Jordan filed suit for declaratory judgment that
if an agreement had been made, it was
unenforceable for fraud and mutual mistake
On appeal, issue was what impact the
paternity evidence had on enforceability of
alleged agreement
13 - 11
Legal Reasoning & Holding:
Fraud in the inducement of a contract is a
defense rendering the contract voidable at
the election of injured party
Jordan’s paternity was a material fact in
settlement of Knafel’s paternity claim
Agreement premised on fraud or mutual
mistake and thus voidable by Jordan
13 - 12
A mistake is a belief about a fact that is not
in accord with the truth
Mistake must relate to facts as they exist at
the time the contract is created
Mistake not due to other party’s statements
Mutual mistakes may be remedied by
reformation
Mistake in Contracts
13 - 13
A unilateral mistake will
not render a contract
unenforceable unless
unequal bargaining position
existed
Example: Estate of Nelson v.
Rice in which the sellers sued
buyers after buyers
recognized a profit on the sale
of estate sale paintings
Mistake in Contracts
13 - 14
Mistake
13 - 15
Duress is wrongful threat
or act that coerces a person
to enter or modify contract
Physical, emotional, or
economic harm
Given duress, victim must
have no reasonable choice
but to enter the contract
See Cabot Corp. v AVX Corp.
Duress
13 - 16
Cabot Corporation v. AVX
Corporation
Facts:
After long negotiation of a long-term supply
contract, parties disputed whether contract was
valid and binding contract (Cabot’s claim) or void
due to economic duress (AVX’s claim)
The Law:
To establish economic duress, party must show he
has been the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act
or threat, and such act or threat must be one
which deprives the victim of unfettered will
13 - 17
Law Applied to Facts:
AVX and Cabot are sophisticated and substantial
commercial parties represented by highly
competent counsel
Cabot was in stronger position than AVX, but
“hard bargaining is not unlawful”
No evidence of coercion, but there is evidence of
AVX’s ratification
Holding:
Judgment affirmed in favor of Cabot
13 - 18
Cabot Corporation v. AVX
Corporation
Undue influence involves
wrongful pressure exerted
on a person during the
bargaining process
Unlike duress, pressure is
exerted through persuasion
rather than coercion
Key is the weakness of the
person “persuaded”
Undue Influence
13 - 19
13 - 20
Review
Test Your Knowledge
True=A, False = B
A contract signed under duress or undue
influence is simply void.
A misrepresentation may be negligent
(innocent) or fraudulent.
Mutual mistakes may be remedied by
reformation
Duress and undue influence have the
same meaning
13 - 21
Test Your Knowledge
Multiple Choice
Elements of innocent misrepresentation:
(a) False assertion
(b) Knowingly made to induce a person to
enter a contract
(c) Reasonable reliance on the assertion by
complainant
(d) All of the above
(e) Both (a) and (c), but not (b)
13 - 22
Test Your Knowledge
Multiple Choice
A unilateral mistake will not render a
contract void unless:
(a) Substantial difference between contract and
market price
(b) Fundamental error occurred
(c) An unequal bargaining position existed
13 - 23
Thought Question
Your landlord tells you
that you will be evicted
from your apartment or
your rent must increase
by $75 per month because
your neighbors complain
about your dog. If you
agree to the increase,
would the contract be
void or voidable under
the theory of duress?
13 - 24