Tutorial 15
This contract seem as though there is consensus. Sandile made an offer and Buli accepted.
However, the consensus that was obtained was obtained improperly.
Consensus can be improperly obtained mainly in 3 ways:
1.
Duress
2.
Misrep
3.
Undue influence
How did Sandile obtain Buli’s consensus improperly?
Issue:
Sandile pressured Buli into entering into the 2
nd
contract, not by violence, but he abused the
relationship he had with Buli in order to influence his decision to contract. Thus this is undue
influence.
Principles:
The principles were set out by Patel v Grobbelaar,
Buli must prove the following:
1.
the wrongdoer has influence over the innocent party
Influence exists when the stronger party is in a position of dominance over the weaker party, or
the weaker party is financially or emotionally dependant upon the stronger party.
2.
which reduces the resistance of the innocent party
The influence must reduce the innocent party’s capacity to make independent decisions, making
will pliable, flexible.
As a result the innocent party isn’t really making a free decision to contract.
3.
an unconscionable use of the influence
The wrongdoer must have used hid influence in an unscrupulous (exploitative) manner. Meaning
of this concept is unclear: is it a moral aspect? The wrongdoer acted immorally or in bad faith.
Does it refer to wrongfulness? The wrongdoer must be wrongful according to the legal convictions
of the community.
4.
induced the innocent party to contract
Undue influence will only be actionable if it actually induced the innocent party to contract on the
terms that he did. Causal influence can take 2 forms:
i.
Fundamental influence: the innocent party would not have entered into the
contract at all without the influence.


You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 3 pages?
- Spring '16
- Na
- Law, Common Law, innocent party, Undue influence