An Attempt at Codifying the Equitable Doctrine of Unconscionable Dealings

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article is written in honour and in memory of my dear colleague the late Professor Denis Ong — a talented, hardworking, and deservedly leading, authority on equity. Here, I seek to articulate a potential ‘codification’ of the equitable
doctrine of unconscionable dealings. While I have been advocating a reform-oriented codification of Australia’s contract law, including the equitable doctrine of unconscionable dealings, for almost 15 years, the ambition of this article is limited to a restatement of lex lata. On my path to that goal, I start by providing a brief overview of the origins of the equitable doctrine of unconscionable dealings. I then proceed to discuss Professor Ong’s view of the equitable doctrine of unconscionable dealings before I engage with the modern key cases on the topic. Having outlined my proposed codification of the equitable doctrine of unconscionability, I then say a few words about the relationship between the equitable doctrine of unconscionability and unconscionability under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), before concluding the article with some final observations.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBond Law Review
Volume34
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 19 Oct 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'An Attempt at Codifying the Equitable Doctrine of Unconscionable Dealings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this