Content deleted Content added
Hairy Dude (talk | contribs) →See also: typo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
Tassedethe (talk | contribs) m v2.05 - Repaired 1 link to disambiguation page - (You can help) - Alexander Armstrong (politician) |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}}
{{Infobox court case
| name = Barton v Armstrong
Line 16 ⟶ 17:
}}
'''''Barton v Armstrong''''' is a [[Judicial Committee of the Privy Council|Privy Council]] decision heard on appeal from the Court of Appeal of New South Wales,<ref name=PC>{{cite BAILII |year=1973 |court=UKPC |num=27 |format=1 |litigants=Barton v Armstrong |parallelcite=[1976] {{abbr|AC|Appeal Cases}} 104 |date=5 December 1973 |courtname=auto |juris=NSW}}.</ref>
The
==Facts==
Alexander Barton was the managing director of a company, Landmark Corporation Ltd., whose main business was property development, its projects passing through 'Paradise Waters (Sales) Pty Ltd'. Barton executed a deed whereby the company would pay $140,000 to [[Alexander Armstrong (Australian politician)|Alexander Armstrong]], a NSW state politician, and buy his shares for $180,000. Armstrong was the chairman of the board.
[[Laurence Street|Street J]] found Armstrong had indeed threatened to have Barton killed. But the [[NSW Court of Appeal]] said Barton failed to discharge the onus that the threat had caused him to make the contract.<ref>''Barton v Armstrong'' [1973] 2 [[NSW Law Reports|NSWLR]] 598 (30 June 1971), [[NSW Court of Appeal|Court of Appeal]] (NSW, Australia).</ref>
==Advice==
The [[Judicial Committee of the
[[Lord Wilberforce]] and Lord Simon, dissenting jointly, held that while in substantial agreement on the law, there was no duress on the facts, but the threats needed to be at least ''a'' reason for entering the contract. They held the case
Line 44 ⟶ 45:
==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Australian contract case law]]
|