Duress and undue influence
Duress and undue influence are vitiating factors that make a contract voidable: duress is illegitimate pressure (to the person, to goods, or economic) that leaves the victim no practical choice; undue influence is the improper use of a relationship of trust or ascendancy to procure agreement.
Last reviewed 14 June 2026
Economic duress requires illegitimate pressure (often an unlawful threat) that was a significant cause of the victim entering the contract, with no reasonable practical alternative (The Universe Sentinel; Pao On v Lau Yiu Long).
Undue influence is either actual or presumed; presumed undue influence arises from a relationship of trust and confidence plus a transaction calling for explanation, and can affect third parties such as banks (Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2)).
Key cases
- Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia v ITWF (The Universe Sentinel) [1983] 1 AC 366
- Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44
- Pao On v Lau Yiu Long [1980] AC 614
Frequently asked questions
What is economic duress?
Illegitimate pressure — often an unlawful threat — that is a significant cause of a party entering a contract when they had no reasonable practical alternative. It makes the contract voidable.
What is the difference between duress and undue influence?
Duress is illegitimate pressure or threats; undue influence is the improper exploitation of a relationship of trust or ascendancy. Both can make a contract voidable.
Related doctrines
Revising contract law for an exam?
Get structured revision notes and timed SQE1 practice that build on Duress and undue influence.
Revising law for an exam?
Get the free “50 Must-Know Cases for UK Law Exams” guide — grouped by module with the ratio for each, sent to your inbox.