How does the law attempt to distinguish threats for the purposes of economic duress from what might be termed as 'ordinary commercial threats'?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer is The law attempts to distinguish threats for the purposes of economic duress from what might be termed as 'ordinary commercial threats' by examining the nature and severity of the threat. In cases of economic duress, the threat must be so severe that it leaves the victim with no reasonable alternative but to enter into the contract. This means that the threat must be more than just a typical bargaining tactic or commercial pressure that is commonly encountered in business negotiations.

Additionally, the law also considers the timing and context of the threat. If the threat is made at a time when the victim is vulnerable or in a position of weakness, such as during a financial crisis or when facing imminent bankruptcy, it is more likely to be considered economic duress. On the other hand, if the threat is made in the normal course of business and does not exploit any existing vulnerability of the victim, it may be seen as an ordinary commercial threat.

Furthermore, the law also looks at the conduct of the party making the threat. If the party making the threat engages in coercive or oppressive behavior, such as using physical force or making false statements, it is more likely to be considered economic duress. Conversely, if the party making the threat is simply exercising its legal rights or engaging in legitimate business negotiations, it may be seen as an ordinary commercial threat.

Overall, the distinction between economic duress and ordinary commercial threats is based on the severity, timing, context, and conduct of the threat, as well as the impact it has on the victim's ability to make a free and voluntary decision.

How Does the Law Attempt to Distinguish Threats for the Purposes