Factors Validating Free Consent- Coercion

COERCION:
If a person commits or threatens to commit an act prohibited by the Indian Penal Code in order to
obtain the other person's consent to an agreement, the consent is obtained through coercion. Coercion
is defined as "forcing or threatening someone to give his consent.

ESSENTIALS OF COERCION:
1. Threat to life and safety
2. Threat against property
3. Coercion and Duress

COERCION (Section 15)

Meaning: It means to compel or to enforce
According to Law: Committing or threatening to commit any act prohibited by the Indian penal code,
or unlawfully detaining or threatening to detain any property, to the prejudice of any person
whatsoever, with the intent of causing any person to enter into agreement.

ESSENTIALS OF COERCION:
1. Threat to life and safety
Act prohibited by the IPC- The term act prohibited by the Indian Penal Code requires a court to
decide in a civil action whether the alleged act of coercion is such that it constitutes an offense. The
threat of bringing a false charm with the intent of forcing someone to do something amounts to
blackmail or coercion.
Case example: Kesarmal s/o LetchmanDas v Valiappa Chettiar
Facts: A transfer of property which was made under ‘the orders of the Sultan, issued in the threatening
presence of 2 Japanese officers during the Japanese occupation of Malaysia
Held: The agreement is not valid. This is because the consent given was not free and therefore the
transfer became voidable at the will of the party whose consent was so caused.

2. Threat against property

Unlawful detention or threat in the real property context means keeping possession of real property
without a right, such as after a lease has expired. Such possession entitles the owner to file a lawsuit for
unlawful detainer, asking for possession by court order, unpaid rent and damages.
Case example: Chin Nam Bee Development v Tai Kim Choo & 4 Ors
Facts: The defendant entered into sale and purchase agreement with the plaintiff in relation to a house
under construction for RM 29,500. Subsequently the defendant demanded additional payment of
RM 4,000 or the house would be sold to another purchaser. The defendant paid the money
Held: the payment was not voluntary but had been made under threat. Thus,there was coercion in the
agreement of paying the additional RM4000 to the A.

3. Coercion and Duress

Duress is a term applied under English Contract Law & Coercion is a term applied under Indian
Contract Law. In coercion even a third party can perform the act but in duress only the party to
contract should perform the act. In Duress, it is only applied for persons and cannot detain property.
Also coercion can be seen as the practice of putting someone under duress.
Case example: Barton v Armstrong [1976] AC 104
Facts: A (the former chairman of a company) threatened B (the managing director) with death if he
did not agree to purchase A’s shares in the company. There was some evidence that B thought the
proposed agreement was a satisfactory business arrangement both from his own point of view and that
of the company. B executed a deed on behalf of the company carrying out the agreement. He sought a
declaration that the deed was executed under duress and was void.
Held: The Privy Council held that if A’s threats were “a” reason for B’s executing the deed he was
entitled to relief even though he might well have entered into the contract if A had uttered no threats
to induce him to do so. The onus was on A to prove that the threats he made contributed nothing to
B’s decision to sign

CASES:
Kesarmal s/o LetchmanDas v Valiappa Chettiar
Chin Nam Bee Development v Tai Kim Choo & 4 Ors
Barton v Armstrong [1976] AC 104
Universe Tankships of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation [1983} 1 AC 399
Kaufman v Gerson [1904] 1 KB 591

SOURCES:
Duress Case Summaries (lawteacher.net)
Coercion under section 15 of Indian Contract Act | Law column
COERCION (lawyersclubindia.com)