An Examination of the Common Law Obligation of Good Faith in the Performance and Enforcement of Commercial Contracts in Australia

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Examination of the Common Law Obligation of Good Faith in the Performance and Enforcement of Commercial Contracts in Australia Chapter One Introduction ‘ … the most important contractual issue of our time.’1 1.1 The Impact of the Classical Model The classical model of contract law2 was premised upon an adversarial ethic where contractual parties legitimately sought to maximise their own interests.3 Under this static model,4 ‘contract law simply set ground rules for self-maximising private ordering.’5 As a corollary of the underlying ideology of liberal individualism,6 (or, in a market context, ‘market individualism’),7 with the fundamental aim of protection of the individual as an autonomous subject,8 contractual performance and the exercise of contractual rights and discretions was virtually unrestrained by considerations of the reasonable expectations or the legitimate interests of the other party to the contact.9 It is these reasonable expectations10 or 1 The description of good faith employed by the Lord Chief Justice of England, Lord Bingham of Cornhill, ‘Foreword’ in R Harrison, Good Faith in Sales (1997) vi. In a similar manner, the implied requirement of good faith in contractual performance and enforcement has been described as perhaps the most important unresolved issue in Australian contract law: J W Carter and A Stewart, ‘Interpretation, Good Faith and the “True Meaning” of Contracts: The Royal Botanic Decision’ (2002) 18 JCL 182, 190. 2 A model consistent with, and reflective of, the economic theory of laissez-faire: A F Mason, ‘Contract, Good Faith and Equitable Standards in Fair Dealing’ (2000) 116 LQR 66, 70. 3 Acting in the manner of a straightforward maximiser, that is a person who attends only to their own interests: D Gauthier, Morals by Agreement (1986) as referred to by R Brownsword, ‘Positive, Negative, Neutral: the Reception of Good Faith in English Contract Law’ in R Brownsword, N Hird and G Howells (eds), Good Faith in Contract: Concept and Context (1999) 13, 32. 4 Classical contract law focused almost exclusively on the static point of contract formation: M Eisenberg, ‘Why There is No Law of Relational Contracts’ (2000) 94 Northwestern University Law Review 805, 807. 5 J M Feinman, ‘Relational Contract Theory in Context’ (2000) 94 Northwestern University Law Review 737, 738. 6 Bigwood refers to contract law’s embracement of individualism as its dominant informing ideology: R Bigwood, ‘Conscience and the Liberal Conception of Contract: Observing Basic Distinctions Part II’ (2000) 16 JCL 191, 203. An economic justification for individualism is the notion of the invisible hand transforming what appears to be selfishness into public benefit: Anthony J Duggan, ‘Is Equity Efficient?’ (1997) 113 LQR 601, 603. 7 A model of self-interested dealers converging on a marketplace, making their one-off exchanges, and going their separate ways: I R Macneil, ‘The Many Futures of Contract’ (1974) 47 S Cal LR 691. 8 R Bigwood, ‘Conscience and the Liberal Conception of Contract: Observing Basic Distinctions Part I’ (2000) 16 JCL 1, 19. 9 Subject only to an observance of the like freedom and equal opportunity of all others to pursue their own self-interest: ibid 20. 10 See below 3.2.1. 1 legitimate interests11 that an obligation of good faith in contractual performance and enforcement may operate to protect.12 Consistent with the classical paradigm, the obligation of good faith in contractual performance and enforcement continues to be rejected as an overriding principle of the English common law,13 regardless of the contractual setting.14 In the colourful language of one commentator, the British courts have treated the doctrine of good faith like a ‘contagious disease of alien origin’.15 What Brownsword16 has labelled as the ‘pragmatic thesis’17 would suggest that the English common law already provides piecemeal solutions to issues that in other jurisdictions may require the application of a good faith obligation or principle.18 Further, under what Brownsword labelled as the ‘repugnancy thesis’,19 good faith is regarded as incompatible with an adversarial ethic20 and likely to undermine unduly freedom and sanctity of contract, and ‘their analogues and by-products: certainty, predictability, finality of transactions, self- reliance, laissez-faire, judicial non-intervention, bargained-for exchange, and the like.’21 In Australia, the twin ‘English’ public policy themes of freedom of contract and the desirability of certainty22 of contract23 in commercial dealings 11 See below 3.2.2. 12 The content of the good faith obligation is more fully considered in chapter six. 13 As in Australia, there are English legislative references to good faith. See, eg, the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UK) (being delegated legislation that gave effect to the European Union’s Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts as adopted by the Council of Ministers on 5 April 1993). This delegated legislation has, in turn, given rise to case law. See, eg, Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank PLC [2002] 1 All ER 97. 14 It has been previously observed that ‘the criterion … of good faith is mysterious and exciting to an English lawyer’: H Collins, ‘Good Faith in European Contract Law’ (1994) 14 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 229, 249. Cf Lord Steyn who observed that English lawyers remain resolutely hostile to any incorporation of good faith principles into English law: Johan Steyn, ‘Contract Law: Fulfilling the Reasonable Expectations of Honest Men’ (1997) 113 LQR 433, 438. 15 G Teubner, ‘Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends Up in New Divergences’ (1998) 61 MLR 11, 11. 16 In the context of arguing that the rationality of English contract law would be enhanced by the adoption of an explicit concept of good faith: R Brownsword, ‘Two Concepts of Good Faith’ (1994) 7 JCL 197. 17 Ibid 198. 18 Bingham LJ also refers to the fact that English law ‘has developed piecemeal solutions in response to demonstrated problems of unfairness.’: Interfoto Picture Library Ltd v Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd [1989] 1 QB 433, 439. This quotation was recently cited with approval by the House of Lords in R (European Roma Rights Centre) v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Intervening) [2005] 2 WLR 1, [59] (Lord Hope of Craighead). 19 Brownsword, above n 16, 198. 20 Ibid. Brownsword notes, in the context of a putative duty to carry on negotiations in good faith, similar comments were made by Lord Ackner in Walford v Miles [1992] AC 128, 138. 21 Bigwood, above n 8, 2 (footnote 4). 22 One commentator has noted that the appeal to the virtue of certainty was the crucial gateway signalling the presence of communication between the practical world of business and the closed doctrinal system of law: H Collins, ‘The Sanctimony of 2 have been commonly repeated by those who seek to retard the development of any contractual obligation of good faith which may be based on competing policy considerations. Members of the judiciary24 and academic commentators alike have been concerned about the impact of the implied obligation of good faith on the sanctity of freedom of contract and the potential uncertainty25 that may be introduced into commercial arrangements negotiated at arm’s length by commercial entities. The following quotation typifies the type of judicial concern traditionally raised: The courts should not be too eager to interfere in the commercial conduct of the parties, especially where the parties are all wealthy, experienced, commercial entities able to attend to their own interests.26 Similar academic concerns have been expressed: Good faith … is an imperfect translation of an ethical standard into legal ideology and legal rules. However much it might stimulate research or encourage inquiry into theories underlying contract law, its appropriate home is the university where it can perform these functions without wreaking practical mischief.27 1.2 A Changing of the Guard In more recent times, the validity of some of these traditional concerns has been openly questioned. Sir Anthony Mason, taking up two points made by Kelly J in Gateway Realty Ltd v Arton Holdings Ltd (No. 3),28 has queried: why are not good faith and fair dealing superior objects to obsessive insistence on total clarity and certainty in contract? And why is emphasis on the need for good faith and fair dealing not likely to lead to the resolution of business 29 disputes? Contract’ in R Rawlings (ed), Law, Society and Economy, Centenary Essays for the London School of Economics and Political Science 1895-1995 (1997) 63, 66. 23 Of course, the desirability of certainty of contract may be questioned. ‘It is said by some, and disputed by others, that businessmen prefer certainty to justice, and like to know where they stand.’: Lord Justice Staughton, ‘Good Faith and Fairness in Commercial Contract Law’ (1994) 7 JCL 193, 194. 24 The potential for the good faith doctrine to undermine certainty of contract law was raised in, amongst other decisions, Austotel Pty Ltd v Franklins Selfserve Pty Ltd (1989) 16 NSWLR 582 and Service Station Association Ltd v Berg Bennett & Associates Pty Ltd (1993) 117 ALR 393. 25 It has been observed that certainty can become a mantra, a euphemism for the sanctity of contracts: Collins, above n 22, 67. 26 Rogers J in GSA Group Ltd v Siebe PLC (1993) 30 NSWLR 573, 579. 27 M Bridge, ‘Does Anglo-Canadian Contract Law Need a Doctrine of Good Faith?’ (1984) 9 Can Bus LJ 385, 412. 28 (1991) 106 NSR (2d) 180, 198. 29 Mason, above n 2, 89. 3 Changing social attitudes also herald the need for a retreat from legal formalism.30 The words of Gleeson CJ are apposite: The demands of justice, as seen through modern eyes, are much less likely to be met by formal and inflexible rules which treat hard cases with the dismissiveness sometimes manifested in earlier times.
Recommended publications
  • A CASE STUDY of LOUTH V DIPROSE*
    STORYTELLING AND THE LAW: A CASE STUDY OF LOUTH v DIPROSE* By Lisa Sarmas^ [Legal storytelling is a relatively new addition to critical legal scholarship. This article draws on its insights and methodology, exploring the stories told and untold in legal discourse, with specific reference to the case of Louth v Diprose. The author links both the outcome of the case and the doctrinal development which it signalled, to the narratives deployed by the majority judges. It is contended that these narratives, as well as those of the judges in dissent, reflect and reinforce domi­ nant ideas about gender and social class. The article concludes with a consideration of the strategies which might be employed by those who seek to include previously silenced voices in legal discourse.] Introduction [I]n some respect this is but one more case in the annals of human relationships in which an infatuated but unrequited suitor has lavished gifts upon the subject of his infatuation, well knowing what he was doing and intending to do it, but in a sense allowing his heart to rule his head. Jacobs ACJ1 To make sense of law and to organize experience, people often tell stories. And these stories are telling. Kim Lane Scheppele2 Legal storytelling poses a radical challenge to established ways of thinking and writing about the law. In recent years it has emerged as a powerful force in the legal academy.3 My aim in this article is to engage its insights in an exam­ * Diprose v Louth (No 1) (1990) 54 SASR 438 (King CJ); Diprose v Louth (No 2) (1990) 54 SASR 450 (Full Court); Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 (High Court).
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening Statutory Unconscionable Conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct
    Strengthening statutory unconscionable conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct February 2010 Strengthening statutory unconscionable conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct Report to the Hon Dr Craig Emerson MP Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs February 2010 © Commonwealth of Australia 2010 ISBN 978-0-642-74587-3 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the: Commonwealth Copyright Administration Attorney-General’s Department 3-5 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600 Or posted at: http://www.ag.gov.au/cca LETTER TO THE MINISTER The Hon Dr Craig Emerson MP Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Dear Minister In response to the terms of reference provided to us on 26 November 2009, we are pleased to enclose our final report, Strengthening statutory unconscionable conduct and the Franchising Code of Conduct. Yours sincerely Professor Bryan Horrigan Mr David Lieberman Mr Ray Steinwall February 2010 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER TO THE MINISTER ......................................................................................................... III GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CLR2021-Vol18 2.Pdf
    Canberra Law Review (2021) 18(1) ii Canberra Law Review The Canberra Law Review is a peer-reviewed law journal published each year by the Canberra Law School at the University of Canberra. It brings together academics, other scholars, legal practitioners, and students within and outside the University. It provides a peer-reviewed open access venue for innovative, cross- disciplinary and creative scholarly articles and commentaries on law and justice. Submissions The editors of the Canberra Law Review seek submissions on aspects of law. We welcome articles relating to theory and practice, and traditional, innovative and cross- disciplinary approaches to law, justice, policy and society. Guidelines • Scholarly articles should be 5,000-14,000 words, case notes 1,500-3,000 words and book reviews 1,000-1,500 words (including references). • Submissions must conform to the 4th edition of the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (AGLC4) and be 12 pt Times New Roman, single-spaced. • Scholarly articles must be accompanied by an abstract of no more than 250 words. • Submissions must not have been previously published in another journal. Submissions should be emailed as MS Office .docx or .doc documents to [email protected]. Peer-Review Scholarly articles are blind peer-reviewed by reviewers. Open Access Consistent with the Canberra Law School’s emphasis on inclusiveness, the Review is open access: an electronic version is available on the University of Canberra website and on the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII) website. ISSN ISSN 1839-2660 (Online) The ISSN for pre-digital (ie print) issues of CLR is 1320-6702.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Decision
    5KIPGFD[#WUV.++ HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA KIEFEL CJ, BELL, GAGELER, KEANE, NETTLE, GORDON AND EDELMAN JJ THORNE APPELLANT AND KENNEDY RESPONDENT Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49 8 November 2017 B14/2017 ORDER 1. Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside the orders of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia made on 26 September 2016 and, in their place, order that the appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs. 3. The respondent pay the appellant's costs of the appeal to this Court. On appeal from the Family Court of Australia Representation M J Foley with P J Woods for the appellant (instructed by Somerville Laundry Lomax) R G Lethbridge SC with G C Eldershaw and D Birch for the respondent (instructed by Jones Mitchell Lawyers) Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports. 4GVTKGXGFHTQO#WUV.++QP0QXGODGTCV 8GTKH[XGTUKQP 5KIPGFD[#WUV.++ 4GVTKGXGFHTQO#WUV.++QP0QXGODGTCV 8GTKH[XGTUKQP 5KIPGFD[#WUV.++ CATCHWORDS Thorne v Kennedy Family law – Financial agreements – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), Pt VIIIA – Pre-nuptial agreement – Post-nuptial agreement – Where fiancé wealthy – Where fiancée had no substantial assets – Where fiancée moved to Australia for purposes of marriage – Where fiancée had no community or connections in Australia – Where fiancée relied on fiancé for all things – Where pre-nuptial agreement provided to fiancée shortly before wedding – Where fiancé told fiancée that if she did not sign agreement wedding would not go ahead – Where independent solicitor advised fiancée against signing – Where pre-nuptial agreement signed – Where substantially identical post-nuptial agreement signed – Whether agreements voidable for duress, undue influence, or unconscionable conduct – Whether primary judge's reasons adequate.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Competition and Consumer Commission V C G Berbatis Holdings Pty Ltd*
    —M.U.L.R- Bigwood - final proof.doc — Curbing Unconscionability: Berbatis in the High Court of Australia — printed 19/05/04 at 20:55 — page 203 of 29 CASE NOTE AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION V C G BERBATIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD* CURBING UNCONSCIONABILITY: BERBATIS IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA RICK BIGWOOD† [This case note critically analyses the High Court’s recent decision in Berbatis. The majority in Berbatis took a restrictive approach in applying s 51AA of the Trade Practices Act to the facts of the particular case. In contrast, the single dissenting judge took a more expansive view of the merits of the appeal. This case note criticises the majority judges’ rather perfunctory handling of the facts of the case — a matter made worse by their Honours’ failure to link the elements of unconscionable dealing to a sophisticated conceptual account of interpersonal exploitation in market exchange contexts. The case note explains how the minority judge’s reasoning might have been reinforced by reference to the developing jurisprudence on so-called ‘lawful act’ duress, especially as found in the United States.] CONTENTS I Introduction.............................................................................................................204 II The Facts, Litigation and Decision .........................................................................205 A The Facts.....................................................................................................205 B The Litigation.............................................................................................206
    [Show full text]
  • The Extent to Which Unconscionability at General Law, the Special Equity In
    THE EXTENT TO WHICH UNCONSCIONABILITY AT GENERAL LAW, THE SPECIAL EQUITY IN GARCIA AND PART IVA OF THE TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 (CTH) ARE AVAILABLE TO A DEBTOR OR GUARANTOR WHEN A FINANCE PROVIDER SEEKS TO ENFORCE A SECURITY by Geoffrey Nigel O’Shea A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Juridical Science University of Technology, Sydney 28 May 2010 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORSHIP/ORIGINALITY I certify that the work in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree nor has it been submitted as part of requirements for a degree except as fully acknowledged within the text. I also certify that the thesis has been written by me. Any help that I have received in my research work and the preparation of the thesis itself has been acknowledged. In addition, I certify that all information sources and literature used are indicated in the thesis. Geoffrey Nigel O’Shea 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my Thesis Master, Geoffrey Moore, for his insights, enthusiasm and assistance provided, without which this thesis could not have been finished. I also recognise the excellent support provided by the Law Faculty Administrative Staff throughout the past eight years. Lastly, I acknowledge the enduring support of my wife and family which saw this task through to completion. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORSHIP/ORIGINALITY................................................ 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Equitable Doctrine of Unconscionable Dealing and the Elderly in Australia
    THE EQUITABLE DOCTRINE OF UNCONSCIONABLE DEALING AND THE ELDERLY IN AUSTRALIA FlONA R BURNS* As the overall population ages, it will be necessary to reappraise the effectiveness of legal doctrines and legislation from the perspective of fhe elderly claimant. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the current operation of the equitable doctrine of unconscionable dealing by a review of recent cases involving elders decided in the High Court, the Federal Court and, in particulal; the State Supreme Courts. It will be argued that despite the attempts of the High Court to read the criteria for unconscionable dealing broadly, lower courts have tended overall to interpret and apply the criteria strictly. Therefore, there has been an ongoing tension between laissez-faire attitudes and equity's role to protect vulnerable persons with the result that it is questionable whether the doctrine has been used consistently and adequately to protect elders who suffer from a special disadvantage. I INTRODUCTION In Australia,' as in other Western co~ntries,~there is strong evidence that the population is living longer, with the result that the overall population is ageing. One consequence of this demographic trend has been the realisation that aspects * Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Sydney. I would like to thank Professor Patrick Parkinson and the anonymous referee for their comments on earlier drafts of this article. My thanks also to Mr Yane Svetiev and MS Myra Chen for some research assistance provided under the University of Sydney Sesqui Grant Scheme 2002. In 2001, 12.4 per cent of the population was aged 65 years or older and 3 per cent were 80 years or older.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Law Journal and Australian Law Journal Reports
    Australian Law Journal and Australian Law Journal Reports INDEX TO VOLUMES 77-82 (2003-2008) Index compiled by ALAN WALKER BA (Hons), DipLib LAWBOOK CO. 2009 Customer Service and sales inquiries: Tel: 1300 304 195 Fax: 1300 304 196 Web: www.thomsonreuters.com Email: [email protected] Editorial inquiries: Tel: (02) 8587 7000 HEAD OFFICE 100 Harris Street PYRMONT NSW 2009 Tel: (02) 8587 7000 Fax: (02) 8587 7100 © 2009 Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited ABN 64 058 914 688 trading as Lawbook Co. ISSN 0813-4073 Published in Sydney by Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited 100 Harris Street, Pyrmont NSW 2009 Typeset by Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited, Pyrmont, NSW Printed by Ligare Pty Ltd, Riverwood, NSW Table of Contents Volumes 77-82 Page Preface .......................................................................................................................................................... iii General Editors of the Australian Law Journal ............................................................................................ iv Table of Authors .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Cases ............................................................................................................................................. 15 General Index .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Emotionally-Transmitted Debt
    Australian Feminist Judgments Project Sexually-transmitted/ emotionally-transmitted debt 'Sexually-transmitted debt' (STD) typically refers to a situation where legal liability is spread from the principal debtor to his partner. While this may occur within a range of relationships and situations, the cases and commentaries mapped here relate to wives (and after 1998 also de facto partners) taking on economic liability for their husbands’ business borrowings or debts of the family company. The main concern is that the spouse takes on obligations due to the circumstances of the relationship, rather than an awareness of the liability or because she receives some benefit. The cases typically arise where there is company insolvency, husband bankruptcy or a relationship breakdown. Often the spouse liability results in the loss of a family home that has been provided as security. This part of the project maps cases, feminist commentary and law reform related to the recognition of STD within contract law and corporations law. We provide a summary of relevant cases and cite feminist academic commentary of the cases where available, noting whether this commentary is neutral, positive or negative. We also identify relevant law reform reports and industry or legislative intervention. In the map, we have identified women judicial officers in red text where known, and links to cases are provided if they are publicly available. This text is up to date to December 2014. Feminist academics have identified that STD can arise in a range of situations that tend to particularly impact upon women. These situations include where debts are incurred as a result of: family violence (Anrows 2015) or uneven power balance within the relationship; a wish to maintain relationships and to protect family; the impact of women’s traditional roles in the private space, such as the male assuming control of family finances; and a lack of opportunity to gain requisite business education or experience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Australian Law of Restitution: Is Andrew Burrows Right That the High Court Has Lost Its Way?
    THE AUSTRALIAN LAW OF RESTITUTION: IS ANDREW BURROWS RIGHT THAT THE HIGH COURT HAS LOST ITS WAY? David JS Jackson 1. Introduction The thesis of Andrew Burrows’ paper is that the 21st century restitution cases decided by the High Court of Australia are a profound disappointment because they attack unjust enrichment theory as unwanted top down reasoning. There are three cases which he has analysed: Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd,1 Farrah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd2 and Lumbers v W Cook Builders Pty Ltd (in liquidation).3 The author’s lament is that much of the reasoning in those cases indicates that the High Court has lost its way in relation to the law of restitution. This is juxtaposed against his view that from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s the High Court’s decisions on restitution led the way. His conclusion is that it is essential to the rationality and coherence demanded by the rule of law that unjust enrichment reasoning is restored to its “rightful central place”. Mr Burrows’ challenge to the reasoning in the three cases is made difficult, in my view, by more than one factor: • First, he doesn’t challenge the result in any of the cases: he accepts that they were all rightly decided. The complaint instead is about reasoning which departs from the taxonomy of restitution lawyers who use the four step “benefit”, “at the expense of”, “unjust factor” and “subject to defences” reasoning (“the restitution conceptual framework”). • Secondly, it should be remembered that in each of those cases the decision below was of an intermediate appellate court which had adopted the restitution conceptual framework in arriving at the wrong result.4 • Thirdly, in my view, there is the flavour of a “turf war” in some of the criticisms which are made.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unconscionable Bargains Doctrine in England and Australia: Cousins Or Siblings?
    Advance Copy THE UNCONSCIONABLE BARGAINS DOCTRINE IN ENGLAND AND AUSTRALIA: COUSINS OR SIBLINGS? YING KHAI LIEW* AND DEBBIE YU † In discussions concerning the modern equitable unconscionable bargains doctrine, judges and commentators ofen draw seamlessly from English and Australian law as though they are siblings from the same family. In reality, their doctrinal elements are substantively and substantially different, and these differences reflect three core points. First, English and Aus- tralian law, respectively, impose negative and positive duties on contracting parties. Sec- ondly, the legal policy underlying equitable intervention in completed contracts is much narrower and targeted in England than it is in Australia. Tirdly, ‘unconscionability’ means different things in the two jurisdictions. Ultimately, the Australian and English it- erations of the doctrine are cousins rather than siblings, which counsels caution as to how the doctrine should be approached from a comparative perspective. CONTENTS I Introduction .................................................................................................................. 2 II Overview ....................................................................................................................... 3 A English Law ...................................................................................................... 4 B Australian Law ................................................................................................. 6 III Te Requirements .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Enduring Powers of Attorney
    ENDURING POWERS OF ATTORNEY: WITH LIMITED REMEDIES – IT’S TIME TO FACE THE FACTS! * NATALIA WUTH ABSTRACT Financial exploitation of older Australians by enduring attorneys is a serious and pervasive problem,1 with the informal nature of the enduring appointment and lack of regulation leaving the elderly susceptible to financial abuse. Over the past two decades, increasing levels of dementia and rising incapacity has focussed the attention on the adequacy of enduring powers of attorney (EPA). The Australian government’s failure adequately to address this problem leaves the states’ legislation as the main legal tools to protect the elderly.2 Further, the increase in the number of reported instances of financial abuse3 illustrates that the opportunity to exploit the enduring appointment should now be classed as a threat to the elderly.4 When theft or fraud occurs through the misuse of an EPA, the remedies available to older Australians are largely undesirable given that they usually occur in the context of a relationship of trust.5 Further, their pursuit is also impracticable given that victims of the financial impropriety are often mentally or physically frail, socially isolated, and vulnerable as a result of their cognitive impairment.6 The concern is that without proper safeguards that financial exploitation may continue for many years undetected and even after death.7 The vulnerable shortcomings stem from lack of proper enforcement mechanisms regulating the abuse of EPAs. A stronger legislative approach is needed8 that defines the financial abuse of the elderly as a crime and imposes significant, meaningful and readily enforceable remedies.9 I INTRODUCTION * Natalia Wuth, LLB (Hons), Bbus, LLM, Nationally Accredited Mediator.
    [Show full text]