(Surname) 1

Student’s Name

Professor’s Name

Course

Date

The situation described in the above case represents a scenario under undue influence.

One party has managed to use unfair persuasion to overcome/influence the free will of another

party. Generally, coercion from outside, a certain type of cheating or improper and unfair

conduct amounts to undue influence. Evan, the wrongdoer exerted undue influence on Don to be

party to the contract to gain personal advantage. Don was coerced to enter into investment in

gambling business that is expected to be impugned. Such kind of coercion is expected to exist in

other kinds of the transaction such as between business partners, doctor-patient and attorney-

client relationships (Ayres & Ian 212).

No evidence shall be required in relation to the impugned transaction due to the existence

of the confidential relationship between the Uncle and Nephew. The burden of proof shifts to

Evan to assert that Don entered freely into the contract and that he relied on his own independent

judgment. Due to the fact of the type of relationship between Don and Evan, it’s expected that

chances of undue influence might increase. Evan went ahead and abused the concept of trust and

confidentiality on the relationship in regard to the transaction. The impact of undue influence

was to attain a voidable contract (Stone & Richard 201).

Equity is expected to compensate the complainant and give relief due to the impact of

undue influence. It’s expected that the agreement was reached due to undue influence and
 (Surname) 2

improper pressure that would not result to duress under the common law due to lack of violence

on the part of the complainant (MacIntyre & Ewan 85).

Lack of genuineness of assent in the contract entered between Don and Evan renders it

voidable since it was entered under undue influence. The relationship between Evan and Don

was of confidence and trust. Evan acted unfairly when he abused the relationship by coerced the

elderly Don to enter the impugned transaction (Sneddon 124). The reliance of Don on Evan for

support helped perpetuate the undue influence. Evan used an unfair persuasion to acquire Dons

funds. Don is entitled to avoid the contract. At the option of Don, the complainant, the contract is

thus voidable (Paterson & Jeannie 12).

 (Surname) 3

Works cited

Ayres, Ian, and Ian Ayres. Studies in Contract Law. Foundation Press, 2012.

McKendrick, Ewan. Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK),

2014.

Paterson, Jeannie Marie, Andrew Robertson, and Arlen Duke. Principles of contract law.

Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia, 2012.

Sneddon, N. C., Rick Bigwood, and Manfred Paul Ellinghaus. "Cheshire & Fifoot: Law of

Contract." (2012).

Stone, Richard, and James Devenney. The modern law of contract. Routledge, 2017.

MacIntyre, Ewan. Business law. Pearson UK, 2018.