Explanation of Article 61
This article addresses the concept of "exploitation," which is: the exploitation by one contracting party of the other party's need. The article stipulates that exploitation leads to the "nullification of the contract," rendering it without any legal effect, except in the cases exempted by the article, which are:
-
First: If the exploitation is "non-influential," meaning: the exploitation affected the will of the contracting party, but even without this exploitation, they would have proceeded to conclude the contract. For example, if a person buys a car at a low price and later discovers that the seller was in dire need of money, but even without this exploitation, they would have bought the car, in this case, the exploitation is non-influential.
-
Second: If the exploitation is "known to the other party," meaning: the exploitation is known to the other party to whom the offer was directed. In this case, the exploitation does not lead to the nullification of the contract.
It is worth noting that exploitation differs from mistake, fraud, and coercion in that mistake, fraud, and coercion relate to defects in will, whereas exploitation relates to the contracting party's exploitation of the other party's need.
This article is considered one of the most important articles related to exploitation, as it protects the rights of the contracting parties and provides them with an opportunity to nullify the contract if it is tainted by exploitation.
Related To
Article 61
-
Deception is the use of fraudulent means by a contracting party to induce the other party to conclude a contract that he would not have otherwise concluded.
-
Non-disclosure shall be deemed a deceptive act if it is done to intentionally conceal a matter that had it been known to the deceived party he would not have concluded the contract.