Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATAS/1041/2005 • CJ GE ATAS/1041/2005 Généré par l'IA

Duress and Voidability of Contractual Assent

Numéro de cause ATAS/1041/2005
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The case involved a dispute over the legal effect of a document executed under duress, where the plaintiff claimed a transaction arising from that document was voidable because their assent was not genuine, while the defendant asserted the document was valid and enforceable. The court reasoned that duress, by vitiating the free will necessary for contract formation, renders a transaction voidable at the option of the coerced party, even if external formalities were met, thus upholding the plaintiff's right to disaffirm the agreement stemming from the improperly obtained consent.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Duress and Voidability of Contractual Assent: The court reasoned that duress, by vitiating the free will necessary for contract formation, renders a transaction voidable at the option of the coerced party, even if external formalities were met, thus upholding the plaintiff's right to disaffirm the agreement stemming from the improperly obtained consent.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
partie au contrat incitation à violer ou à résilier un contrat crainte fondée documents valables droit des obligations contrat d’option

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
Costs were imposed on the appellant in the dispositive order.
Généré par l'IA
A/839/2006
Contractual Amendments Voided Due to Duress from Unrelated Leverage
A/255/2005
Misrepresentation Voids Contractual Assent
A/1856/2003
Promissory Note Validity Upheld Despite Duress Claim
A/1491/2003
Contract Validity and Enforceability Dispute
A/1295/1997
Contract Enforceability Based on Mutual Intent Over Formalities

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Costs were imposed on the appellant in the dispositive order.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

               "#$%&"#''( "$'%$"#''(

))

 )* *  ) *

+  # ! #, -.  #''( 



-! ////////// 







0//////////  !"





                !

   )$#$)      * +  $''( , - .  ////////// 0 ),1  2 "! 3   4!   ,  - 4 3 - -  5//////////6  478

9":;3,3- 9 < <9!,=38

3"!,39 4!  "> 4<3, $% + $''(8

    3  > 3 $? @ $''( 4!   -97 !  3 !- 39    A* ,!> $''(    =" 3 B   " 3<>+C

9>3!-38

 ;< D;  +3   0)CAC(* (*CAC :CA28

)  1 * )* *  ) *

!

23-4-   5  6-- -  78 $9# * :

AC  -3<>+C

$C =3BC

?C  -,"3; C  ;44   ," 3            >6   

, 4!3,"E 4 "F, ,;44



#$$%&#$''(