If you answer to an action taken under protest and duress , it means that you are under protest because you do not agree to what is being said and do not wish to make a contract and duress means that someone if forcing you to do it agaist your will which makes the document void on its face , or not valid if you use that in connection with your signature. i hope this clears things up in your mind , cheers !!! you can also learn more @ thinkfree.ca and tpuc.org
V.C. is the latin term for signing under duress.
There are 3 classes of duress. 1. Duress to person 2. Duress to property 3. Economic Duress Contracts under into under duress to property and economic duress are voidable. Hence the injured party can choose to rescind the contract or affirm it. But for contracts entered into under duress to person, the contract is void at the start. It is treated as though there is no contract.
She signed the contract under duress, fearing the consequences if she did not comply with the demands.
the statement you gave should be inadmissable in court because it was given under duress
Edward II (under duress) Richard II (under duress) Edward VIII
anyunghasayo
duress means when you are under pressure in any case and some one apply pressure to accept the offense which you are not committed. this is duress
If duress can be shown, no it would not be legal. Proving it can be difficult but it is not impossible.
only under duress
no
A document signed under duress is invalid. The only problem is proving the duress.
To be forced to do something by someone else.