The systemic impact of the defect of duress in contracts according to the Saudi Civil Transactions System -Comparative analytical study-

Abstract

Consent, as one of the pillars of the contract, may be tainted by defects that disturb it and make it defective or non-existent, and one of those defects is coercion. And the Saudi regime has stipulated the concept of coercion and made it clear that it is a threat, and I thought that expressing it with the term coercion is preferable. The system also stipulated the types of coercion, and I saw that there was no effect of this diversification. The system also stipulated the conditions for coercion, which are: that the coercion be the result of a threat of grave and imminent danger. I considered that it is sufficient for the coercion to cause an effect immediately, even if there is no imminent danger, and one of the conditions is that the conclusion of the contract be the result of coercion from the contracting party or from someone else with his knowledge or presumed knowledge of it, including the inability of the coerced person to repel the coercion, as the system stipulates the effective means of coercion, which are That the coercer uses a legitimate means to achieve unjust coercion, or the coercer uses an illegitimate means of coercion to achieve the right, or the coercer uses an illegitimate means to achieve unjust coercion, All of these means make the contract invalid or voidable.