A Fall Between Two Stools: The Supreme Court Confines Lawful Act Duress

Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly (2022)

10 Pages Posted: 20 Jan 2022 Last revised: 21 Nov 2022

See all articles by Harry Sanderson

Harry Sanderson

Brasenose College Oxford

Henry Cooney

The University of Western Australia

Date Written: January 18, 2022

Abstract

In Pakistan International Airline Corporation v Times Travel (UK) Ltd, the UK Supreme Court considered lawful act duress. The Court confirmed the existence of the doctrine after many years of uncertainty. This is welcome. But the Court significantly narrowed the scope of its application to two specific circumstances: where pressure exerted by a defendant comprises a demand supported by a threat to report criminal activity, and where pressure derives coercive force from the defendant’s use of ‘illegitimate means’ to manoeuvre the claimant into a position of weakness. We argue that this may prevent the law of duress from developing in a clear and principled manner.

Keywords: duress, unjust enrichment, lawful act duress, lawful-act duress, restitution, times travel, pakistan international airline corporation, UK supreme court, united kingdom supreme court, vitiating factor, illegitimate pressure, unconscionability

Suggested Citation

Sanderson, Harry and Cooney, Henry, A Fall Between Two Stools: The Supreme Court Confines Lawful Act Duress (January 18, 2022). Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly (2022), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4011451

Harry Sanderson (Contact Author)

Brasenose College Oxford ( email )

Henry Cooney

The University of Western Australia ( email )

35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, WA Western Australia 6009
Australia

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
289
Abstract Views
998
Rank
224,769
PlumX Metrics