← All Authorities
United States Leading Case unconscionability

Williams v Walker-Thomas Furniture Co

350 F.2d 445 (D.C. Cir. 1965)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
Year1965
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A court may refuse to enforce a contract or clause unconscionable at formation, considering absence of meaningful choice and unreasonably one-sided terms.

Key Principle

A court may refuse to enforce a contract or clause found to be unconscionable at the time it was made, considering absence of meaningful choice and unreasonably favorable terms.

Area of Law

contract

Related Cases

Mann v Paterson Constructions Pty Ltd (2019) 267 CLR 560

On termination of a building contract, a builder may recover reasonable value of work done in restitution, subject to the contract price as a ceiling where work was performed under a valid contract.

Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2016) 258 CLR 525

Bank late payment fees are not penalties where they represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss or protect a legitimate interest of the stipulating party.

Simic v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation (2016) 260 CLR 85

High Court of Australia examined the principles governing rectification of written contracts for common intention and unilateral mistake in equity.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Williams v Walker-Thomas Furniture Co and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Williams v Walker-Thomas Furni...