2,553
edits
Difference between revisions of "Contract Defences"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
* Client signed a contract, but says they were misled about the extent of their liability.
| * Client signed a contract, but says they were misled about the extent of their liability.
| ||
* Client misunderstood a contract. | * Client misunderstood a contract. | ||
== Summary of the law== | |||
Even with the basic elements of a contract present (see the Contracts Overview), common law and statute law provide a number of grounds for a party to avoid having a contract enforced against them. These '''defences to contract actions''' give the defending party a legal excuse to get out of the contract. Without such defences, the contract would be legally enforceable. Remedies to enforce contracts are discussed in the section on Contract Remedies. (See also the sections on Opting Out and Cooling-off Periods and Unfair or Deceptive Practices.) | |||
=== Defences versus causes of action=== | |||
This section covers defences only. Defences are the grounds upon which a consumer can defend a legal action by someone seeking to enforce a contract. This is different from a “'''cause of action'''”, which is a consumer’s right to bring a legal action themselves. In some instances, some legal principles can be both defences and causes of action, depending on who is bringing the action. For example, if a consumer refuses to make payments called for in a contract, they may be able to make a defence on the grounds of unconscionability (see below). If the consumer has already paid for the goods or services, they could also use the grounds of unconscionability to bring a legal action (or “cause of action”). | |||
{{Consumer and Debt Law Navbox|type = consumer}} | {{Consumer and Debt Law Navbox|type = consumer}} | ||