The unlawful exercise of economic pressure can result in coercion of an individual and risk unwittingly engaging in risky financial practice. Coercion refers to the act of using threats or psychological pressure to force someone to behave in a way contrary to their desires. In contract law, coercion is used as a form of defense against a crime in which the defendant uses threats to force the plaintiff to commit a crime that is against his will. A party who is compelled to perform an act or contract under duress may terminate the contract and render it null and void. The requirements for the use of coercion as a defence before the courts vary from state to state. Here are the general requirements that must be met: In criminal law, when a person is found mentally ill because he believed that God had commanded him to commit the crime (“divine decree”), one interpretation of insanity is that he acted under the illusion of God`s coercion. [12]:615–625 Economic coercion is a common claim in commercial contract disputes. In criminal law, the defendant`s motive for breaking the law is generally irrelevant unless a defendant raises a legally admissible affirmative defence. (Coercion may or may not be permitted as a positive defense for a particular charge – in particular, it is generally prohibited for murder, and many jurisdictions also prohibit it for sexual assault. Malum in offenses generally recognize coercion less as a defense than crimes malum prohibitum.) Coercion has two aspects. The first is that it denies the person`s consent to an act, such as sexual activity or entering into a contract; or, second, as a possible legal defense or justification for an otherwise unlawful act.
[3] A defendant who relies on the defence of coercion admits to having violated the law, but asserts that he is not responsible because the act, although he broke the law, was committed only because of extreme unlawful pressure. [4] In criminal law, a forced defence is similar to an admission of guilt, in which partial guilt is admitted, so that if the defence is not accepted, the offence is admitted. Personal financial coercion can be caused in many ways. For example, a person may lose their job or end up foreclosing their home if they are unable to pay their mortgage. A health crisis and high medical bills could wipe out a savings account. Theoretically, these events could cause a person to act illegally due to the stress of the situation. Proof of coercion in a contract requires three things: Consideration is what is referred to when negotiating and exchanging goods and services. It is vital, and without it, there is no treaty. If one side benefits, but the other receives only what was originally promised, it is coercion. For coercion to be considered a defense, four conditions must be met:[3] In a sense, financial coercion places a company between a rock and a hard place, where there is no right solution. This situation can lead someone to act under duress to protect their finances. Economic coercion occurs when one party exerts unlawful economic pressure to force another party to enter into a contract that it would not otherwise accept.
This can also happen if one party threatens to terminate an existing contract unless the other party agrees to enter into another contract. The court may terminate the contract if the plaintiff can prove that he had no choice but to enter into the contract. Coercion is a threat of harm to force someone to do something against their will or judgment; in particular, an unlawful threat by a person to force the manifestation of another person`s apparent consent to a transaction without real will. – Black`s Law Dictionary (8. 2004 Edition) There are many types of undue threats that can cause a party to enter into a contract: threats to commit a felony or tort (e.g., assault or seizure of property), to sue, to institute civil proceedings if a threat is made in bad faith, a “duty of good faith and fairness arising from a contract with the recipient, ” or reveal embarrassing details about a person`s private life. A coercive mutant involves a hostage-taking, in which a person is forced to commit a criminal act under the threat that their family member or close associate will be killed immediately if they refuse (commonly known as tiger abduction). This amount has been increased in certain ransom cases, when a person commits theft or embezzlement on the orders of a kidnapper to ensure the life and liberty of a family member. Coercion, however, is not a complete defense against all crimes.
For example, the general rule, both at common law and today, is that coercion is never a defence to murder; That is, one never has the right to kill another innocent person, even if his life has been threatened, although this part can be questioned if several people are threatened with death, if the accused does not kill a single person or less than threatened (such a situation is similar to the problem of the cart). [5] A person may also invoke a forced defence when force or force is used to force the person to enter into or reject a contract. The common law takes a narrow approach to coercion as it relates to actual violence or threat of violence against the person or unlawful detention. However, equity took a broader view of “fusion” in terms of the kind of pressure that could constitute coercion in order to facilitate, and has since taken hold. [10] First, the threat must be inappropriate. Second, there must be no reasonable alternative. For example, if a supplier threatens to delay shipment of the necessary goods unless the buyer agrees to pay more than the contract price, this would not be a constraint if the buyer could obtain identical deliveries from someone else. Third, the incentive criterion is subjective. It does not matter whether the threatened person is exceptionally shy or whether a reasonable person did not feel threatened. The question is whether the threat actually obtained the consent of the victim. Facts such as the victim`s belief that the threatened person was able to carry out the threat and the time between the threat and consent are relevant to determining whether the threat triggered consent. If a person is forced to enter into a contract under threat of bodily harm, he or she is a victim of physical coercionThe threat of physical harm that wrongly leads a party to enter into a contract.
It is defined by the (second) reformulation of contracts in article 174: “If conduct that appears to be a manifestation of the consent of a party who does not intend to engage in such conduct is physically coerced, the conduct is not effective as a manifestation of consent.” Defending necessity involves committing an illegal act to prevent the risk of harm to another person. The defence of necessity and the defence of coercion can be used in court to show that there was no alternative but to commit the unlawful act. However, the two terms differ in that coercion is caused by the actions of another party, while necessity is a choice between two evils.