Are coerced agreements involuntary?

Law and Philosophy 3 (1):133 - 145 (1984)

It is widely supposed that agreements made in response to coercion are entered into involuntarily for that reason. This paper argues that that supposition is false and that it has generated a good deal of avoidable confusion in the courts and among some legal commentators. Agreements entered into involuntarily of course, have no legal standing. But, on any plausible account of coercion, agreements entered into in response to coercion are an inevitability of social life. To prohibit them would be to prohibit many agreements we ought to and do enforce (e.g. labor agreements entered into under threat of strike). This is not to deny that agreements induced by certain uses of force or certain threats of force have and ought to have no standing. But here it is the type of force or threat that invalidates the agreement, not the use of coercion per se.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00211227
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 43,865
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Coercive Interference and Moral Judgment.Jan-Willem van der Rijt - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):549 - 567.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
32 ( #267,169 of 2,266,104 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #598,676 of 2,266,104 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature