Illegitimate Pressure CASES
In English contract law, illegitimate pressure refers to threats or coercion that undermine a party’s free consent to an agreement. It is a key element of economic duress and can render a contract voidable.
Definition and Principles
Illegitimate pressure goes beyond hard bargaining. It arises where one party applies unlawful or unconscionable pressure, leaving the other with no practical choice but to agree. The law protects genuine consent while allowing robust commercial negotiation.
Requirements for Establishing
- Pressure: The claimant must show they were subjected to coercion or threats.
- Illegitimacy: The pressure must be unlawful, unconscionable, or contrary to public policy.
- Causation: The pressure must have induced the agreement or variation.
- Lack of practical choice: The claimant must demonstrate they had no realistic alternative but to submit.
Practical Applications
Illegitimate pressure is often alleged in commercial contexts, such as threats to breach an existing contract unless more favourable terms are accepted. Courts distinguish between acceptable commercial pressure and coercion that vitiates consent.
Importance
Recognising illegitimate pressure ensures that contracts rest on free and voluntary agreement. It prevents exploitation while maintaining space for legitimate negotiation and commercial leverage.
Home » Illegitimate Pressure
Ship owners paid money into a union's welfare fund under threat of their ship being 'blacked' and prevented from sailing. They sued successfully to recover the payment, claiming economic duress. The case established a key test for economic duress. Facts The appellants, Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia, owned the ship ‘The Universe Sentinel’. While it was docked at Milford Haven, the respondent union, the International Transport Workers Federation (ITF), ‘blacked’ the ship. This meant tugs would not service the vessel, preventing it from sailing. The blacking was part of ITF’s policy to improve the poor pay and conditions of crews
A supplier threatened to withdraw future credit facilities from a customer unless a disputed invoice was paid. The customer paid under protest and sued, claiming economic duress. The court held the threat, being a lawful act made in good faith, was not duress. Facts The plaintiff, CTN Cash and Carry Ltd (CTN), was a wholesaler of tobacco products. The defendant, Gallaher Ltd, was a major cigarette manufacturer and CTN’s supplier. The parties had a long-standing commercial relationship, but no overarching supply contract. Gallaher provided credit facilities to CTN, but this was at Gallaher’s sole discretion and could be withdrawn at
Facts Kafco (Importers and Distributors) Ltd, a small company importing basketware, secured a major contract to supply goods to Woolworths plc. They engaged Atlas Express Ltd, a national road carrier, to handle the distribution to Woolworths’ retail outlets. An Atlas manager inspected Kafco’s goods and, based on a visual assessment, quoted a carriage rate of £1.10 per carton, anticipating that each of Atlas’s trailers could hold between 400 and 600 cartons. A contract was concluded on this basis. However, after the first collection, the Atlas driver discovered that due to their size, only 200 cartons could fit onto a trailer.
