Atlas Express Ltd v Kafco
Encyclopedia
Atlas Express v Kafco Ltd [1989] QB 833 is an English contract law
case relating to duress
.
with baskets. They had a ‘trading agreement’ with Atlas Express for at least six months to do the deliveries. Atlas Express realised it had underestimated the size of cartons to be carried. So it was costing more to deliver. Kafco would not vary the price. Atlas sent an empty truck to Kafco, with a letter saying if a higher charge was not agreed to, the truck would leave empty. Kafco would go broke without the contract, so they signed. Later, Kafco refused to pay, and argued there was economic duress, and also no new consideration.
English contract law
English contract law is a body of law regulating contracts in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth , and the United States...
case relating to duress
Duress
In jurisprudence, duress or coercion refers to a situation whereby a person performs an act as a result of violence, threat or other pressure against the person. Black's Law Dictionary defines duress as "any unlawful threat or coercion used... to induce another to act [or not act] in a manner...
.
Facts
Kafco Ltd had a contract to supply WoolworthsWoolworths Group
Woolworths Group plc was a listed British company that owned the high-street retail chain, Woolworths, as well as other brands such as the entertainment distributor Entertainment UK and book and resource distributor Bertram Books...
with baskets. They had a ‘trading agreement’ with Atlas Express for at least six months to do the deliveries. Atlas Express realised it had underestimated the size of cartons to be carried. So it was costing more to deliver. Kafco would not vary the price. Atlas sent an empty truck to Kafco, with a letter saying if a higher charge was not agreed to, the truck would leave empty. Kafco would go broke without the contract, so they signed. Later, Kafco refused to pay, and argued there was economic duress, and also no new consideration.
Judgment
Tucker J held there was economic duress in this situation, which gave Kafco the right to avoid the contract. When Kafco’s Mr Armiger signed, he ‘did so unwillingly and under compulsion… He had no bargaining power. He did not regard it as a genuine arm’s length re-negotiation in which he had a free and equal say and, in my judgement, that view was fully justified.’ He distinguished economic duress from ‘commercial pressure, which on any view is not sufficient to vitiate consent. The borderline between the two may in some cases be indistinct.’See also
- English contract lawEnglish contract lawEnglish contract law is a body of law regulating contracts in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth , and the United States...
- Lloyds Bank Ltd v BundyLloyds Bank Ltd v BundyLloyds Bank Ltd v Bundy [1974] is a landmark case in English contract law, on undue influence. It is remarkable for the judgment of Lord Denning MR who advanced that English law should adopt the approach developing in some American jurisdictions that all impairments of autonomy could be collected...
[1975] QB 326 - Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co., 350 F.2d 445 , was a court opinion, written by Judge J. Skelly Wright, that had a definitive discussion of unconscionability as a defense to enforcement of contracts in American contract law. As a staple of first-year law school contract law courses, it has...
350 F.2d 445 (C.A. D.C. 1965)