Contents |
Chapter I |
Introductory |
|
Introductory |
|
Unfair Terms legislation not an obstacle to foreign investment |
Chapter II |
The Present State of Law in India and Need for Improvement |
|
The Present State of Law in India and Need for Improvement |
|
Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872: Illegality and public policy |
|
Section 23 and Public Policy |
|
Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act |
|
Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act |
|
Section 28 saves two types of contracts under the exceptions |
|
A recent judgment of the Supreme Court requires mention in this context |
|
Sale of Goods Act, 1930 |
|
Judicial Review of contracts entered by an authority which is a 'State' within Article 12 of the Constitution and application of Art 14 |
|
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 |
|
Section 2(o) has laid down the principles and basis of determining what is a 'restrictive trade practice' as under |
|
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 |
|
Competition Act , 2002 |
|
Specific Relief Act, 1963 merely grants discretion to Courts to refuse specific performance |
|
Usurious Loans Act, 1918: Reopening of transactions |
|
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 |
|
Provisions of Indian Contract Act, 1872 and other existing laws referred to above are not sufficient to meet the problems of today |
Chapter III |
Standard form Contracts and Their Nature |
|
Standard form Contracts and Their Nature |
|
The Standard form contracts: original purpose disclosed |
|
Interpretational issues in standard form contracts |
|
Supreme Court on Contracts by Government and Public Institutions and Art 14 |
|
Other Contracts |
Chapter IV |
Judicial Prouncements in India on Unfair Terms |
|
Judicial Prouncements in India on Unfair Terms |
|
The Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Limited Case |
|
Section 208. Unconscionable Contracts Term |
|
Uptron's case: (AIR 1998 SC 1681) |
|
Delhi Transport Corporation's case: (AIR 1991 SC 101) |
|
LIC v. Consumer Education & Research Center: 1995 (5) SCC 482 |
|
Pawan Alloys Case, AIR 1997 SC 3910 |
|
Conclusion |
Chapter V |
Unfair Terms in Contract - A Comparative Study |
|
Unfair Terms in Contract - A Comparative Study |
|
Position in U.S.A.: American Restatement (Second Edition) and UCC: Unconscionability |
|
Wentz's Case |
|
New Principles of procedural and Substantive Unconscionability (USA) |
|
Australia |
|
The Contract Review Act, 1980 (New South Wales) |
|
Section 7 which deals with 'principal relief in respect of unjust contracts reads as follows |
|
Trade Practices Act, 1974 (Australia) |
|
Uniform Consumer Credit Code (UCCC) |
|
Fair Trading Act, 1999 (Victoria): |
|
Fair Trading (Amendment) Act, 2003 (Victoria) |
|
Amadio's case |
|
Position in United Kingdom |
|
Unconscionability and equity jurisdiction of Courts in United Kingdom |
|
Unconscionability at Common Law in United Kingdom |
|
Legislation in United Kingdom |
|
The basic features of Unfair Contract Terms Act, 1977 (UK): (UCTA) |
|
The basic features of Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulation, 1999 (UTCCR) |
|
U.K. Law Commission's Consultation Paper |
|
U.K. Law Commission: Final Report (No.292) |
|
European Council Directive (1993) Applicable to UK and the Regulations of 1994, 1999 and 2001 |
|
Canada |
|
New Zealand |
|
South African Law Commission |
|
Discussion Paper 65 on Unreasonable Stipulations in Contracts and the Rectification of Contracts (1996) amd Final Report (1998) |
Chapter VI |
Common Law: Unfairness in Regard to Specific Performance of Contract Terms |
|
Unfairness in Regard to Specific Performance of Contract Terms |
Chapter VII |
Need To Have Procedural and Substantive Divide |
|
Need To Have Procedural and Substantive Divide |
|
Prof. Leff starts in his lengthy paper by a criticism of s. 2.302 of the Uniform Commercial Code |
|
He observed (p. 539) |
Chapter VIII |
Procedural Unfairness: Comparative Law |
|
UCTA (1977): (procedural unfairness) |
|
UTCCR (1999): (procedural unfairness) |
|
Fair and Reasonable Test: (procedural) |
|
South Africa |
|
Guidelines to Court: Procedural aspects |
|
Canada (procedural unfairness) |
|
Australia (procedural unfairness) |
|
Section 14: Executed Contracts |
|
New Zealand (procedural unfairness) |
Chapter IX |
Substantive Unfairness: Comparative Law |
|
United Kingdom |
|
UCTA (1977) (substantive unfairness) |
|
Bill of 2004 prepared by UK and Scottish Law Commissions) |
|
South Africa: Provisions of the Draft Bill attached to the S.A. Law Commission Report, 1998 (p 47) |
|
Section 1(3): Preventing unfairness |
|
Canada: (substantive unfairness) |
|
Australia: (substantive unfairness) |
|
New Zealand: (substantive unfairness) |
Chapter X |
Segregating Procedural and Substantive Provisions of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 and The Specific Relief Act, 1963 |
|
Segregating Procedural and Substantive Provisions of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 and The Specific Relief Act, 1963 |
(A) |
Procedural unfairness: Indian statute law: |
|
Indian Contract Act, 1872 |
|
Specific Relief Act, 1963 |
(B) |
Substantive unfairness: Indian Statute Law |
|
Indian Contract Act, 1872 |
|
Specific Relief Act, 1963 |
Chapter XI |
Need To Define 'general Procedural Unfairness' and 'general Substantive Unfairness' Under The Indian Law |
|
Need To Define 'general Procedural Unfairness' and 'general Substantive Unfairness' Under The Indian Law |
|
In Irrawady Flotilla Co. vs. ILR 18 Cal. 620 (PC), the Privy Council observed |
Chapter XII |
Discussion and Recommendations for Draft Bill (2006) on Unfair Terms (Procedural and Substantive) |
|
Discussion and Recommendations for Draft Bill (2006) on Unfair Terms |
|
Section 2(i) defines 'voidable contract' as follows |
|
Our definition of 'contract' in section 2(a) of the Bill will be as follows |
|
Hence, we propose to define 'Court' in section 2(b) as follows |
|
Procedural unfairness separately defined in section 5 |
|
Debate whether mere proof of procedural unfairness has to be coupled with some unfair advantage or unfair disadvantage |
|
learned Judge referred to what Richard A. Lord stated in the Commentary on, Williston on Contracts (4th Ed) (1998) |
|
Guidelines: for procedural unfairness: section 6 |
|
General substantive fairness: section 12 |
|
Section 62 of the Sale of Goods Act states |
|
Choice of Law |
|
Burden of Proof |
|
Section 15: Act to apply to executed contracts |
|
Section 17: Reliefs to be granted by Court |
|
Section 18 applicability of the Act and exemptions |
Annexure |
Unfair (Procedural and Substantive) Terms in Contract Bill, 2006 |
Chapter I |
Preliminary |
1. |
Short title, extent and commencement |
2. |
Definitions |
Chapter II |
Procedural Provisions and Procedural Unfairness |
3. |
Procedural provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872) |
4. |
Procedural provisions of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963) |
5. |
General procedural unfairness |
6. |
Guidelines for purposes of determining general procedural unfairness under section 5 |
Chapter III |
Substantive Provisions and Substantive Unfairness |
7. |
Substantive provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 |
8. |
Substantive provisions of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 |
9. |
Exclusion or restriction of certain liabilities to be substantively unfair |
10. |
Exclusion or restriction of rights, duties or liabilities referred to in section 62 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 |
11. |
Choice of law clauses |
12. |
General substantive unfairness |
13. |
Guidelines for purposes of determining general substantive unfairness under sections 9 to 12 |
14. |
Burden of proof |
15. |
Provisions of the Act to apply for executed contracts |
16. |
Court's power to raise an issue of unfairness of contract or a term thereof |
17. |
Relief that may be granted by Court |
18. |
Applicability of the Act and exemptions |