Undue Influence and Exploitation

P. Saprai
{"title":"Undue Influence and Exploitation","authors":"P. Saprai","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198779018.003.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter distinguishes two contexts in which promises might be made: in situations of ‘thick’ trust where the parties are in a pre-existing close or intimate relationship with one another, and cases of ‘thin’ trust where the relationship between the parties is more like that between what Lon Fuller called ‘friendly strangers’. Typically, contracts take place in the context of thin trust. However, ‘promise theorists’ have tended to lose sight of this distinction—assuming that contract must reflect the morality of promises that take place in close relationships. This chapter relies on this distinction to explain the undue influence doctrine, which applies in those much less common cases where contracts take place in the context of close relationships. Such cases create a risk of relational exploitation by the promisee, and this chapter argues that this normative concern plays an essential normative role in explaining the undue influence doctrine. The promise theory has tended to downplay the role of exploitation at the cost of explaining the doctrine. Undue influence is an example of what is described here as a ‘composite’ doctrine’, that is, it is the product of the interaction of a multiplicity of moral principles or values and cannot adequately be explained by a single value like promise alone.","PeriodicalId":423198,"journal":{"name":"Contract Law Without Foundations","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contract Law Without Foundations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198779018.003.0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter distinguishes two contexts in which promises might be made: in situations of ‘thick’ trust where the parties are in a pre-existing close or intimate relationship with one another, and cases of ‘thin’ trust where the relationship between the parties is more like that between what Lon Fuller called ‘friendly strangers’. Typically, contracts take place in the context of thin trust. However, ‘promise theorists’ have tended to lose sight of this distinction—assuming that contract must reflect the morality of promises that take place in close relationships. This chapter relies on this distinction to explain the undue influence doctrine, which applies in those much less common cases where contracts take place in the context of close relationships. Such cases create a risk of relational exploitation by the promisee, and this chapter argues that this normative concern plays an essential normative role in explaining the undue influence doctrine. The promise theory has tended to downplay the role of exploitation at the cost of explaining the doctrine. Undue influence is an example of what is described here as a ‘composite’ doctrine’, that is, it is the product of the interaction of a multiplicity of moral principles or values and cannot adequately be explained by a single value like promise alone.
不当影响和剥削
本章区分了两种可能做出承诺的情况:在“厚”信任的情况下,当事人彼此之间存在着预先存在的密切或亲密关系;在“薄”信任的情况下,当事人之间的关系更像是朗·富勒所说的“友好的陌生人”之间的关系。通常,合约发生在瘦信任的环境中。然而,“承诺理论家”往往忽视了这一区别——假设契约必须反映发生在亲密关系中的承诺的道德性。本章依据这一区别来解释不正当影响原则,该原则适用于在密切关系背景下签订合同的那些不太常见的情况。这种情况造成了承诺人利用关系的风险,本章认为,这一规范性问题在解释不当影响原则方面起着至关重要的规范性作用。承诺理论倾向于以解释教义为代价,淡化剥削的作用。不当影响是这里所描述的“复合”学说的一个例子,也就是说,它是多种道德原则或价值观相互作用的产物,不能仅仅用承诺这样的单一价值观来充分解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信