The Laughlins argue that the loan agreement was unconscionable. I agree that it was. Many times our Court of Appeal has expressed the test as follows for setting aside an agreement on the ground of unconscionability. A party must establish inequality in the position of the parties arising from the ignorance, need, or distress of the weaker which left him in the power of the stronger, and must establish proof of substantial unfairness in the bargain. See McNeill v. Vandenberg, 2010 BCCA 583 at para. 15, as one relatively recent instance where that expression of the test was adopted in that court.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.