Rokotavo and Kuro are neighbours in Suva, Fiji. Rokotavo is well educated and has a regular job and family. Kuro is not married. He has difficulty with reading, works irregularly and suffers from severe depression. He also drinks alcohol to excess. Over the five years that Rokotavo and Kuro have been neighbours, Kuro has frequently relied on Rokotavo's advice about personal financial matters. Kuro wanted to sell some land which he had inherited from his father. Rokotavo offered to buy the land from Kuro for $200,000. Kuro agreed to sell to Rokotavo for that price. Rokotavo's solicitor drafted a contract of sale which specified a price of $200,000. The contract contained a clause which allowed either party to terminate the contract if Rokotavo failed to get a bank loan for the purchase price within 21 days of the contract date. Rokotavo took the contract document to Kuro and Kuro signed it without seeking advice from anyone else. Two weeks later, Kuro's brother, Panapasa, telephoned Rokotavo. He told Rokotavo that he was concerned about the very low price for which Kuro had agreed to sell the land. Panapasa said that comparable blocks of land in Suva had recently sold for almost twice the price and that Kuro wanted to terminate the contract. Rokotavo told Panapasa that Kuro could not terminate the contract because he (i.e. Rokotavo) had already obtained a bank loan for the purchase price. 

Can Kuro avoid the contract on the ground of undue influence?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

In the given scenario it is possible for Kuro to argue that the contract should be set aside on the ... View the full answer