- Published on
Legal Terms – Economic Duress
Traditionally, in contract law, a claim asserting that a contract was voidable due to *duress could only succeed if the transaction was induced by a threat to the individual (i.e., physical duress) (Skeate v Beale (1840) 11 Ad & El 983, 113 ER 688). A contract may now be voidable due to economic duress, as established in Occidental Worldwide Invest Corporation v Skibs A/S Avanati [1976] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 293, which refers to the unlawful exertion of economic pressure to compel an individual to engage into an agreement. The fundamental components include the issuance of an illegitimate threat (e.g., to violate a current contract or to perpetrate a tort), that the coercion substantially influences the aggrieved party to consent to the contract, and that the aggrieved party possesses no viable alternative to acquiescing to the terms proposed by the individual making the threat (Universe Tankships Inc. of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation [1983] 1 AC 366 (HL)). A third type is duress of goods, defined as the unlawful retention of another person's property, compelling that party to acquiesce. The precise legal acknowledgment of this category remains incomplete (Dimskal Shipping Co SA v International Transport Workers’ Federation (The Evia Luck) [1992] 2 AC 152 (CA)).
Traditionally, in contract law, a claim asserting that a contract was voidable due to *duress could only succeed if the transaction was induced by a threat to the individual (i.e., physical duress) (Skeate v Beale (1840) 11 Ad & El 983, 113 ER 688). A contract may now be voidable due to economic duress, as established in Occidental Worldwide Invest Corporation v Skibs A/S Avanati [1976] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 293, which refers to the unlawful exertion of economic pressure to compel an individual to engage into an agreement. The fundamental components include the issuance of an illegitimate threat (e.g., to violate a current contract or to perpetrate a tort), that the coercion substantially influences the aggrieved party to consent to the contract, and that the aggrieved party possesses no viable alternative to acquiescing to the terms proposed by the individual making the threat (Universe Tankships Inc. of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation [1983] 1 AC 366 (HL)). A third type is duress of goods, defined as the unlawful retention of another person's property, compelling that party to acquiesce. The precise legal acknowledgment of this category remains incomplete (Dimskal Shipping Co SA v International Transport Workers’ Federation (The Evia Luck) [1992] 2 AC 152 (CA)).
- Published on
Legal Terms - economic loss
The courts differentiate between financial or economic loss arising from physical damage, which is typically recoverable, and pure economic loss, which does not stem from personal injury or damage to the claimant's property (Spartan Steel & Alloys v Martin & Co (Contractors) Ltd [1972] QB 27 (CA)). The courts impose a somewhat restricted duty of care for pure economic loss.
The courts differentiate between financial or economic loss arising from physical damage, which is typically recoverable, and pure economic loss, which does not stem from personal injury or damage to the claimant's property (Spartan Steel & Alloys v Martin & Co (Contractors) Ltd [1972] QB 27 (CA)). The courts impose a somewhat restricted duty of care for pure economic loss.
- Published on
Nicolene Ltd v Simmonds (1953) Court of Appeal
The plaintiffs proposed to purchase 3,000 tons of steel reinforcing bars from the defendant. The pricing and dimensions of the bars were established. The defendant's letter of acceptance stated: "As you have directed the order to me, I cannot confirm using my standard printed form, which includes the typical force majeure and war clauses; however, I presume we concur that the standard conditions of acceptance are applicable." The plaintiffs initiated legal action against the defendant for breach of contract due to the defendant's failure to fulfill delivery as stipulated in the agreement, while the defendant contended that no binding contract existed. A binding contract was determined to exist. The phrase 'the customary terms of acceptance apply' was devoid of significance but could be detached from the remainder of the contract and disregarded. The statements were devoid of significance as the defendant lacked a printed document or any customary stipulations. He was alluding to the structure and stipulations of a limited business with which he was affiliated. According to Denning LJ:
The plaintiffs proposed to purchase 3,000 tons of steel reinforcing bars from the defendant. The pricing and dimensions of the bars were established. The defendant's letter of acceptance stated: "As you have directed the order to me, I cannot confirm using my standard printed form, which includes the typical force majeure and war clauses; however, I presume we concur that the standard conditions of acceptance are applicable." The plaintiffs initiated legal action against the defendant for breach of contract due to the defendant's failure to fulfill delivery as stipulated in the agreement, while the defendant contended that no binding contract existed. A binding contract was determined to exist. The phrase 'the customary terms of acceptance apply' was devoid of significance but could be detached from the remainder of the contract and disregarded. The statements were devoid of significance as the defendant lacked a printed document or any customary stipulations. He was alluding to the structure and stipulations of a limited business with which he was affiliated. According to Denning LJ:
- Published on
Legal Terms - economic loss
The courts differentiate between financial or economic loss arising from physical damage, which is typically recoverable, and pure economic loss, which does not stem from personal injury or damage to the claimant's property (Spartan Steel & Alloys v Martin & Co (Contractors) Ltd [1972] QB 27 (CA)). The courts impose a somewhat restricted duty of care for pure economic loss.
The courts differentiate between financial or economic loss arising from physical damage, which is typically recoverable, and pure economic loss, which does not stem from personal injury or damage to the claimant's property (Spartan Steel & Alloys v Martin & Co (Contractors) Ltd [1972] QB 27 (CA)). The courts impose a somewhat restricted duty of care for pure economic loss.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC)
A UN entity established to advocate for the adherence to human rights and the overall well-being of individual rights. ECOSOC does analyses and generates reports on economic, cultural, social, educational, and health issues.
A UN entity established to advocate for the adherence to human rights and the overall well-being of individual rights. ECOSOC does analyses and generates reports on economic, cultural, social, educational, and health issues.
- Published on
Legal Terms -educational authorities
The entities accountable for the statutory education system established by the Education Act 1944 are the Secretary of State for Education and Skills and local education authorities (LEAs). In England and Wales, they are county councils or unitary councils, and within Greater London, the London borough councils. The Education Reform Act of 1988 established provisions allowing schools, with the Secretary of State's agreement, to disengage from local education authority oversight and transition to grant-maintained status. A novel structure for educational institutions was instituted by the School Standards and structure Act of 1998, together with the Education Acts of 2002 and 2005. This comprised a tripartite structure of community schools (managed by the LEAs), voluntary schools (often with a unique religious character), and foundation schools (formerly grant-maintained schools, now financed by the LEAs instead of central government). The Education and Inspections Act 2006 permitted a foundation school to establish a charitable foundation (or trust) to assist the institution. The objective of these trust schools, which continue to be managed by the Local Education Authority, is to use the experience, enthusiasm, and knowledge from other institutions and professions to enhance standards. Academy schools were established in 2000, followed by the introduction of free schools (legally classified as academies) in 2011; both are state-funded yet exempt from Local Education Authority oversight. Applicable legislation comprises the Education Act 2011 and the Academies Act 2010.
The entities accountable for the statutory education system established by the Education Act 1944 are the Secretary of State for Education and Skills and local education authorities (LEAs). In England and Wales, they are county councils or unitary councils, and within Greater London, the London borough councils. The Education Reform Act of 1988 established provisions allowing schools, with the Secretary of State's agreement, to disengage from local education authority oversight and transition to grant-maintained status. A novel structure for educational institutions was instituted by the School Standards and structure Act of 1998, together with the Education Acts of 2002 and 2005. This comprised a tripartite structure of community schools (managed by the LEAs), voluntary schools (often with a unique religious character), and foundation schools (formerly grant-maintained schools, now financed by the LEAs instead of central government). The Education and Inspections Act 2006 permitted a foundation school to establish a charitable foundation (or trust) to assist the institution. The objective of these trust schools, which continue to be managed by the Local Education Authority, is to use the experience, enthusiasm, and knowledge from other institutions and professions to enhance standards. Academy schools were established in 2000, followed by the introduction of free schools (legally classified as academies) in 2011; both are state-funded yet exempt from Local Education Authority oversight. Applicable legislation comprises the Education Act 2011 and the Academies Act 2010.
- Published on
Legal Terms – During Her (or His) Majesty
A colloquial term for the duration of confinement assigned to a prisoner acquitted due to *insanity. Such an individual was hence referred to as a joy patient. The offender must be admitted to a hospital designated by the Home Secretary (either a local psychiatric facility or a *special hospital) and remain there until further notice; however, the term “during Her Majesty’s pleasure” is no longer included in the Act.
A colloquial term for the duration of confinement assigned to a prisoner acquitted due to *insanity. Such an individual was hence referred to as a joy patient. The offender must be admitted to a hospital designated by the Home Secretary (either a local psychiatric facility or a *special hospital) and remain there until further notice; however, the term “during Her Majesty’s pleasure” is no longer included in the Act.
- Published on
Legal - Duty
. 1. A legal obligation to perform or abstain from performing any action. Contrast authority. 2. A tax imposed by the government, specifically on specified items and transactions. Examples include customs duty, excise duty, and stamp duty.
. 1. A legal obligation to perform or abstain from performing any action. Contrast authority. 2. A tax imposed by the government, specifically on specified items and transactions. Examples include customs duty, excise duty, and stamp duty.
- Published on
Legal Terms – Duty of Care
The legal duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent harm. Liability in tort for negligence exists only if the act or omission causing damage constitutes a breach of a duty of care due to the claimant. There exists an obligation to exercise caution in most circumstances when one can fairly anticipate that their actions may inflict bodily harm on individuals or property (see to the neighbour principle). The obligation is owed to anyone likely to be impacted by the action in question. Consequently, physicians have a duty of care towards their patients (Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 583 (QB)), and individuals utilizing the highway bear a duty of care to all other road users (Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691). Nonetheless, there exists no overarching obligation to avert harm caused by others or to assist individuals or property in peril. Liability for negligent statements is more restricted than liability for negligent actions (refer to negligent misstatement), and there exists no overarching obligation to prevent *economic loss or *psychiatric harm. The presence and extent of the duty of care will be contingent upon the specific circumstances of the case and the relationship between the persons involved. The courts have established a three-tier test to ascertain the existence of a duty of care (Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 (HL)), and in unprecedented circumstances, they consider other policy considerations. The majority of responsibilities of care arise from judicial rulings; yet, some are specified in legislation, such as the Occupier’s Liability Act 1957.
The legal duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent harm. Liability in tort for negligence exists only if the act or omission causing damage constitutes a breach of a duty of care due to the claimant. There exists an obligation to exercise caution in most circumstances when one can fairly anticipate that their actions may inflict bodily harm on individuals or property (see to the neighbour principle). The obligation is owed to anyone likely to be impacted by the action in question. Consequently, physicians have a duty of care towards their patients (Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 583 (QB)), and individuals utilizing the highway bear a duty of care to all other road users (Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691). Nonetheless, there exists no overarching obligation to avert harm caused by others or to assist individuals or property in peril. Liability for negligent statements is more restricted than liability for negligent actions (refer to negligent misstatement), and there exists no overarching obligation to prevent *economic loss or *psychiatric harm. The presence and extent of the duty of care will be contingent upon the specific circumstances of the case and the relationship between the persons involved. The courts have established a three-tier test to ascertain the existence of a duty of care (Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 (HL)), and in unprecedented circumstances, they consider other policy considerations. The majority of responsibilities of care arise from judicial rulings; yet, some are specified in legislation, such as the Occupier’s Liability Act 1957.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Duty solicitors
Solicitors who participate on a rota basis at magistrates' courts to provide assistance and counsel to defendants without representation.
Solicitors who participate on a rota basis at magistrates' courts to provide assistance and counsel to defendants without representation.
