Contracts which are contrary to public policy

Als draagmoeder wordt aangemerkt de vrouw die zwanger is geworden met het voornemen een kind te baren ten behoeve van een ander die het ouderlijk gezag over dat kind wil verwerven, dan wel anderszins duurzaam de verzorging en opvoeding van dat kind op zich wil nemen. Haarlem 19 December , no. Nieuwenhuis n Reference Works. Primary source collections. Open Access Content. Contact us.

Sales contacts. Publishing contacts. Social Media Overview. Terms and Conditions. Privacy Statement. Login to my Brill account Create Brill Account. Email this content Share link with colleague or librarian You can email a link to this page to a colleague or librarian:. Your current browser may not support copying via this button. Author: Zeeshan Mansoor 1. Online Publication Date: 14 Nov Abstract Metadata References Metrics.

Access options Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below. Buy instant access PDF download and unlimited online access :. Add to Cart. Other access options. Personal login Log in with your brill. Export References. Abstract Metadata. Content Metrics. Sign in to annotate. Delete Cancel Save. Cancel Save. View Expanded. The terms of a contract cannot be enforced even if it has been agreed by both the parties if the same is in violation of public policy.

In simple words, Pubic Policy refers to the policies of government for the welfare of society, It can also be said that if any agreement contravenes any developed interest of society or morals of time, it can be said to be as against public policy and the agreement turns to be void. It has been held that an agreement could not be enforced if it was against public good[ii] or in violation with general policy of the law[iii]. In the case of P. Rathinam v. Union of Idnia[iv], the apex court held that the term public policy is open for modification and expansion.

In the case of Gherulal Parekh v. Mahadevdas Maiya[v], the apex court observed:. To allow this to be a ground of judicial decision, would lead to the greatest uncertainty and confusion.

It is the province of the statesman, and not the lawyer, to discuss, and of the Legislature to determine, what is best for the public good, and to provide for it by proper enactments. It is the province of the judge to expound the law only; the written from the statutes; the unwritten or common law from the decisions of our predecessors and of our existing Courts, from text writers of acknowledged authority, and upon the principles to be clearly deduced from them by sound reason and just inference; not to speculate upon what is the best, in his opinion, for the advantage of the community.

Some of these decisions may have no doubt been founded upon the prevailing and just opinions of the public good; for instance, the illegality of covenants in restraint of marriage or trade. They have become a part of the recognized law, and we are therefore bound by them, but we are not thereby authorised to establish as law everything which we may think for the public good, and prohibit everything which we think otherwise. Sree Pusapathi Venkapathi Raju[vi], held that court can only refuse to enforce such agreements when the court sees that it is not made with a bonafide object or reward seems to be extortionate and held that champerty and maintenance are not illegal in India.

In the case of Veerayya v. Sobhanandri[vii] a person entered into agreement for taking back the charge of S. What contracts are considered to be contrary to public policy? When trying to answer this question, you would need to examine general principles instead of examining a contract's individual terms. When a contract is considered to be contrary to public policy, the contract will not be enforceable.

General principles are used to determine if a contract opposes public policy, which is why many people find this issue very complicated. When questions of public policy arise, courts must be very careful in their decisions. An agreement that opposes public policy or law will be void. It is not possible to expressly forbid acts described in the contract, however. The reason that it's hard to define which contracts are contrary to public policy is that applying public policy takes place on a case-by-case basis.

Some acts are not expressly forbidden by law but their nature is so mischievous that they cannot be included in a legal contract. A contractual condition could be opposed to public policy if the state has an interest in preventing the condition from being performed. The view of contracts that are contrary to public policy has changed over time.

For example, a contractual condition that may be upheld today could very well have been opposed to public policy in the past. In most cases, courts will assist someone who has been harmed by a breach of contract if they can prove that a breach has actually occurred.