A court looking to see if an unconscionable bargain had been reached could look at whether or not the transaction benefits the mortgagor. The fact that a covenantor had obtained and would continue to enjoy benefits under the relevant agreement which he claimed to be unenforceable was pro tanto a reason for holding that the covenant was not in unreasonable restraint of trade.
Lord Cross
[1975] AC 561
Australia
Citing:
Cited – Amoco Australia Pty Ltd v Rocca Bros Engineering Co Pty Ltd PC 1975
A court looking to see if an unconscionable bargain had been reached could look at whether or not the transaction benefits the mortgagor. The fact that a covenantor had obtained and would continue to enjoy benefits under the relevant agreement which . .
Cited by:
Cited – Amoco Australia Pty Ltd v Rocca Bros Engineering Co Pty Ltd PC 1975
A court looking to see if an unconscionable bargain had been reached could look at whether or not the transaction benefits the mortgagor. The fact that a covenantor had obtained and would continue to enjoy benefits under the relevant agreement which . .
Cited – Alec Lobb (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil Ltd CA 1985
The court was asked whether the terms of a lease and lease back amounted to an unconscionable bargain and was unenforceable.
Held: The court affirmed the decision at first instance, but emphasised the need for unconscientious behaviour rather . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.219908 br>