How have courts interpreted coercion in this context?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Kong v. Kong, 2015 BCSC 1669 (CanLII):

In Quaille v. Vandervelle, 2009 BCSC 5, this court stated that coercion in this context means a person is put into such a state of mind that if they could express their true intent, he or she would say: “this is not my wish but I must do it”. Not surprisingly this enquiry is heavily fact laden.

Other Questions


In what circumstances will the Supreme Court in BCSC 871 interpret the principles of the Court of Appeal in the context of the Canadian Court of Justice's decision on the doctrine of common law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the legal test for a court to interpret the interpretation of the House of Commons Bill of Representatives in the context of cross-party legislation? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted contracts in the context of the interpretation of contracts? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts interpreted the principle of equalization in the context of the Rules of Justice? (British Columbia, Canada)
How has this been interpreted by this court in the context of perjury cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts interpreted the meaning of the word "judicial review" in the context of land Titles? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts interpreted the interpretation of a "deposit clause" in standard form contracts? (British Columbia, Canada)
How has the court interpreted vulnerability in the context of a fiduciary duty of trust in an investment relationship? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted the term “as liquidated damages” in the context of a contract? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts interpreted the rule of common law in the context of personal injury cases? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.