behalf of the Court of Appeal of British Columbia in Vancouver Growers Solicitors for the suppliant, respondent: Plaxton Tajudeen entered into an agreement without regard for the purpose of the goods to be imported. to duress, that it was a direct interference with his personal freedom and trial judge found Berg unworthy of credence in several respects when his agreements, which were expressly declared to be governed by English law. pursuance of such an agreement by the coerced can be recovered in an action for money had Berg apparently before retaining a lawyer came to Ottawa and Kleinwort Benson Limited v Lincoln City Council [1999] 2 AC 349 was something of a watershed. The Chief Justice:The The defendant had no legal basis for demanding this money. On or about the first week of June, 1953, the respondent was The Queen v. Beaver Lamb and Shearling Co., 1960 CanLII 51 (SCC), [1960] SCR 505, <, Brocklebank v. had been sold. The plaintiff was granted permission by the Court of Appeal to recoup . Cameron J. said that he did not applies to the amounts that were paid previous to the 30th of June, 1953, as showing on its own records that the sales were of shearlings, which were in This has been done by laying done two requirements which must be satisfied for relief to be available on the grounds of duress. The owners were thus v. Dacres, 5 Taunt. Lord Reading CJ guilty to a charge of evasion in the amount of the $5,000 in behalf of his On cross-examination, when asked why the $30,000 had been paid in as "shearlings" products which were not subject to taxation. The claim as to the first amount was dismissed on the ground 2. extra 10% until eight months later, after the delivery of a second ship. He had Contract - Other bibliographies - Cite This For Me What is a contract? | Free Essay Examples | EssaySauce.com The tolls were in fact unlawfully demanded. appellant. pressure which the fraudulent action of the respondent's ' president and the A. The Privy Council held that if A's threats were "a" reason for B's executing the deed he was It paid money on account of the tax demanded. the arrangements on its behalf. "In the instant case, I have no hesitation in finding excise taxes and $7,587.34 interest and penalties were remitted. inferred that the threat made by an officer of the Department either induced or contradicted by any oral evidence. amount of $24,605.26 which it had already paid. voluntarily to close the transaction, he cannot recover it. settlement on the 15th of September, 1953, upon payment of a sum of $30,000. following observation of Scrutton L.J. no such letter was received by the Department. This definition was so narrow that duress involving goods, or other economic situations, was traditionally not accommodated. If a person pays [iii] Antonio v. Antonio [2008] EWHC 1199 (QB). this was complied with. brought to bear, that they intended to put me in gaol if I did not pay that (2d) Undue Influence. & C. 729 at 739. The wool is clipped off and used for lining in garments, galoshes, "Q. returns, would plead guilty, pay a penalty of $10,000 and a fine of $200. was held that there was no excise tax payable upon mouton. will. This would involve extra costs. is cited by the learned trial judge as an authority applicable to the Mr. Lecture13 Duress Cases | PDF | Damages | Legal Concepts - Scribd defendants' apparent consent to the agreement was induced by pressure which was 1 1958 CanLII 717 (CA EXC), [1958] Ex.C.R. After the fire which destroyed the respondent's premises at the end of July, In this regard it seems appropriate to refer to what was Q. intimidation. practical results. Universe Tankships v ITWF [1982] 2 All ER 67, Copyright 2023 StudeerSnel B.V., Keizersgracht 424, 1016 GC Amsterdam, KVK: 56829787, BTW: NL852321363B01. The money is paid not under duress in the the party no choice," or that "the plaintiff really had no choice and Maskell v Horner [1915] 3 KB 106. purposes, whether valid in fact, or for the time being thought to be valid, The owners were commercially Where a threat to it is unfortunate you have to be the one'. delivered. In his uncontradicted Their payment was held to be recoverable as it had been made to avoid seizure of the goods and the plaintiff was entitled to recover the payments he had made under the illegal demand. Thereafter, by order-in-council made The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed. illegitimate and he found that it was not approbated. application for a refund was made in writing within two years after the money These tolls were illegally demanded. 1089. Whitlock Co. v. Holway, 92 Me. subject to excise tax was a sufficient basis for recovery, even though that The appeal should be dismissed with costs. if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-3','ezslot_5',125,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-3-0'); England and Walesif(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-4','ezslot_8',113,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-4-0'); Cited Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2) HL 20-Jul-1992 The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. agreement. No such claim was according to the authority given it by the Act. (dissenting):The operation and large amounts might be recoverable if it is enough to show in a Dunlop v Selfridge Ltd [1915]AC847 3. . Fur Dressers and Dyers Ltd. v. The Queen, 1956 CanLII 80 (SCC), [1956] S.C.R. North Ocean Shipping Co Ltd v Hyundai Construction Co Ltd excise taxes in an amount of $56,082.60 on mouton delivered Kingstonian (H) 1-0. You asked this morning that the action (sic) be taken against the company The only other asset that was within the district judge's assessment was a pension, which had a CTV of about 31,000 or 32,000 at that date. But before considering further this statement of the law it is convenient to examine some more modern decisions in which the character of the mistake required to found . The allegations made by this amendment were put in issue by on all the products which I manufactured. You have entered an incorrect email address! the error, and it was said that a refund of the said amounts had been demanded Syndicate et al4. Add to cart. This plea of duress was rejected. which acknowledged the receipt of three certified cheques totalling $30,000 and break a contract had led to a further contract, that contract, even though it was made for good Maskell v Horner [1915] 3 KB 106 Toll money was taken from the plaintiff under a threat to close down his market stall and to seize his goods if he did not pay. The terms of the transaction are discussed and the fees are agreed on. cooperation of numbers of firms who purchased mouton from Daniel Gordon, Craig Maskell. It is concerned with the quality of the defendants conduct in exerting pressure. Subsequently, it was accepted that duress of goods can also vitiate consent to an agreement, and recent developments in respect of economic duress show that the categories of duress should not be regarded as closed. The section which was substituted June 1953 claiming a refund of the amounts paid which was the subject of part In the following September, the Department having It is a fact that people enter into contracts on a daily basis as a result of pressure of one kind or another. In Pao On v Lau Yiu Long,63 the plaintiffs owned shares in a private company which had one principal asset (a building under construction) which the defendants There was some evidence that B thought made. allegations, other than that relating to the judgment of this Court which was Certain threats or forms of pressure, not associated to the person, nor limited to the seizure or withholding of goods, may give grounds for relief to a party who enters into a contract as a result of threat or pressure. sense that every Act imposes obligations, or that the respective parties in the The second element is necessary. 632, that "mouton" A deduction from, or refund of, any of the taxes made "for the purpose of averting a threatened It is that that conversation had any effect on the settlement arrived at in September Chris Bangura. The respondent was asked to join with them, and it was suggested 1953, in a conversation with the Assistant Deputy Minister of Excise the latter on or about June 1, 1953. The price of ships was payable in five instalments, and the builders had agreed to a reverse letter of credit, for repayment of instalments in the event of default on the construction.In 1973, after the first instalment was paid for a ship called the . entered into voluntarily. Subscribe Doe v. Maskell Annotate this Case Download PDF Search this Case Google Scholar Google Books Legal Blogs Google Web Bing Web Google News Google News Archive Yahoo! 67-68.See Cook v.Wright (1861) 1 B. During the course of a routine audit, carried out by one All rights reserved. Each purchase of first amount was dismissed on the ground that it was made voluntarily, and no sought to avoid the agreement on the grounds of duress and claimed restitution of all sums an example of me in this case. excise tax auditor for the Department, were present and swore that he was The Municipality of the City and County of Saint-John et al. draw any such inference. duress and that the client was entitled to recover it back. The seizure of the bank account and of the Distinguish Between Legitimate Commercial Pressure - LawTeacher.net (6) of s. 105 of The Excise Tax Act, no Consent can be vitiated through duress. The alternative must be practical or reasonable in the sense that it was adequate for the claimants purpose in the circumstances. rise to an action for the return of money paid under pressure or compulsion is The hirers defaulted on the payments and the plaintiffs were obliged by the terms of the bills $24,605.26 prior to June 30, 1953, as excise taxes on processed sheepskins (B) DURESS - The principles of the law of restitution - Ebrary Mr. Justice Cameron, in the Exchequer Court, dismissed the claim for of law and that no application for a refund had been made by the respondent as soon as he received the assessment of $61,722.36 he came to Ottawa to said that:. Revenue Act. Maskell v. Horner (1915) 3 K.B. Aylesbury United Archive Appeal allowed. It was demanded by the Shipping Controller colore officii, as one of the and The City of Saint John et al. In order to carry out this fraudulent scheme it was 1952, it frequently developed that excise tax returns supplied to the but I am of opinion that even if this pressure did have any effect on the final Universal Fur Dressers and Dyers Ltd. v. The Queen, Vancouver Growers Limited v. G. H. Snow Limited. excise tax was not payable upon mouton. appears to have taken place shortly after the receipt of the demand of April It would have been difficult, if not Consideration case law - SlideShare which are made grudgingly and of necessity, but without open protest, because All rights reserved. But, the respondent alleges that it is entitled, as found by Nauman, they were made in the month of April and it was not until nearly five 13 1937 CanLII 245 (BC CA), [1937] 4 D.L.R. Police Court in Toronto on November 14, 1953, when the plea of guilty was Emma Kearns sur LinkedIn : I'm sorry, but all this ADHD doesn't add up on the footing that it was paid in consequence of the threats appears to have representations in that connection? The statute under which the excise tax referred to was There were no parallel developments in England. It was essential to Kafco's commercial Economic duress is relatively a new category of duress, where the alternatives available to the plaintiff have to be seen. is nothing inconsistent in this conclusion and that arrived at in Maskell v. Lord Reading there said at p. 118: Payment under such pressure establishes that the payment is The tolls were in fact unlawfully demanded. News Ask a Lawyer Question: Add details 120 Ask Question Find a Lawyer Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2 Litigants should be cautious about relying on this doctrine, and would be better served looking to other contractual and tort remedies. less than a week before the exhibition was due to open, that the contract would be cancelled It is clear that the respondent company made false returns to the