Unconscionable Inaccess to Justice

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unconscionable Inaccess to Justice

AU - Enman-Beech, John

PY - 2019/10/19

Y1 - 2019/10/19

N2 - Unconscionability can and should be used in appropriate cases to ensure access to justice for contracting parties in Canada. In this comment, I articulate a test for the application of unconscionability to what I call access clauses — clauses such as arbitration clauses and forum selection clauses that affect how a contracting party can access an adjudicative process. This test follows, and rationalises, recent judicial attempts to apply unconscionability to access clauses in the cases of Douez v Facebook and Heller v Uber. Previous attempts to make sense of — or criticise — these applications of unconscionability, have been limited in attempting to discipline the doctrine to the logic of contract law. But unconscionability is equitable: it relieves parties from contractual obligations despite every requirement of contract law being met. Cases applying unconscionability to ensure access to justice, which access clauses sometimes deny, reflect a new kind of inequity from which courts will relieve, rather than a new error of contractual logic. That inequity is an inaccess to justice.

AB - Unconscionability can and should be used in appropriate cases to ensure access to justice for contracting parties in Canada. In this comment, I articulate a test for the application of unconscionability to what I call access clauses — clauses such as arbitration clauses and forum selection clauses that affect how a contracting party can access an adjudicative process. This test follows, and rationalises, recent judicial attempts to apply unconscionability to access clauses in the cases of Douez v Facebook and Heller v Uber. Previous attempts to make sense of — or criticise — these applications of unconscionability, have been limited in attempting to discipline the doctrine to the logic of contract law. But unconscionability is equitable: it relieves parties from contractual obligations despite every requirement of contract law being met. Cases applying unconscionability to ensure access to justice, which access clauses sometimes deny, reflect a new kind of inequity from which courts will relieve, rather than a new error of contractual logic. That inequity is an inaccess to justice.

KW - contract law

KW - boilerplate

KW - consumer protection

KW - unconscionability

KW - choice of forum

KW - arbitration

M3 - Article

VL - 96

SP - 77

JO - Supreme Court Law Review 2d

JF - Supreme Court Law Review 2d

IS - 1

ER -