Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 JUNE 2017

Supreme Court rejects duress argument made following mediation

The decision affirms that conduct capable of constituting duress is limited to threatened or actual unlawful conduct.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Summary

St.George and Ian Craig Press engaged in a mediation. At the conclusion of the mediation, a settlement deed was executed by the parties.

Unbeknownst to St.George, Mr Press included the letters "V.C" in small type next to his signature – apparently an abbreviation for the Latin phrase - vi coactus - by which Mr Press alleged that he meant that he was signing the deed under duress.

As part of the settlement deed, Mr Press executed consent orders in favour of St.George which St.George agreed not to file with the Court if Mr Press carried out certain actions.

Mr Press failed to carry out those actions and St.George sought to file the consent orders. The filing of the consent orders was opposed by Mr Press. St.George made an application pursuant to section 73 of the Civil Procedure Act for an order enforcing the settlement reached at mediation.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from