{"id":32617,"date":"2020-02-04T10:33:37","date_gmt":"2020-02-04T02:33:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/zegal.com\/?p=32617"},"modified":"2023-05-24T17:35:44","modified_gmt":"2023-05-24T09:35:44","slug":"unconscionable-contracts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zegal.com\/en-hk\/blog\/post\/unconscionable-contracts\/","title":{"rendered":"Unconscionable Contracts"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Avoiding unconscionable contracts<\/h4>\n

There are good deals, and there are bad deals. It\u2019s all a part of the business. <\/span><\/p>\n

And the law won\u2019t necessarily save you from a bad bargain. Sometimes, however, a bargain is not simply bad<\/span> \u2013 it\u2019s downright unconscionable.<\/span> And i<\/span>n these cases, the person on the wrong end of the bargain may be able to find recourse in the law. <\/span><\/p>\n

Hong Kong<\/h4>\n

Legal recourse in Hong Kong exists in the form of statutes. There are, for example, general consumer protection provisions found in the Sales of Goods Ordinance (Cap. 26), the Supply of Services (Implied Terms) Ordinance (Cap. 457), and the Control of Exemption Clauses Ordinance (Cap. 284)<\/strong>, which all seek to regulate the conduct of contracting parties. The one that would fall squarely under the ambit of this article, is the Unconscionable Contracts Ordinance (Cap. 458)<\/strong> (the \u201c<\/span>UCO<\/span>\u201d). <\/span><\/p>\n

The UCO applies only to contracts for the sale of goods or supply of services in which one of the contracting parties is a consumer<\/span>. The aggrieved party may institute proceedings and seek the Court\u2019s agreement that the contract (or parts of it) is indeed unconscionabl<\/span>e (and thus unenforceable). In <\/span>accordance to section 6 of the UCO, which enumerates a number of factors to be considered, such <\/span>as:-<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n