The Principle Of Unconscianbility Within Australian Consumer Law

875 Words4 Pages
The principle of unconscianbility within Australian consumer law was applied most notably in the case of Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio. These judgments later played a role in determining the outcome of the Kakavas v Crown Melbourne Ltd, whereby the High court considered the principles and outcomes from the first case in the latter. Unconscionable conduct is concerned with the abuse of a dominant position by one contracting party over a weaker contracting party. When determining if this principle of unconscionable conduct has occurred, three main principled must be assed: Wether or not the party claiming unconscionable conduct has a special disability This special disability was evident to the unconscionable party Unconscionable party has an onus to prove that they should still uphold the contract The concept of a special disability arose for consideration throughout the case of Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd v Amadio. The party to the case were two elderly migrants who were unfamiliar with written english (footnote from case study). The migrants were the parents of Vincenzo Amadio (Vincenzo) who held a high corporate position within V. Amadio Builders Pty. Ltd. (The company). Vincenzo asked his parents to provide a security starting that the mortgage would be limited to $50,000 over a duration of sixth months which however to his best knowledge was not so limited. The principle of special disadvantage that applied to the respondents led to their

    More about The Principle Of Unconscianbility Within Australian Consumer Law

      Open Document