Topic
Business law: Intoxication must be a result of connivance against the aggrieved party
Instructions
Should the law allow someone that becomes voluntarily incapacitated through intoxication or other means escape from a contractual obligation using incapacity as a defence?
Answer preview
A contract is only avoidable on ground of intoxication if it can be proven that the intoxication was as a result of connivance or act of the individual against whom the relief is sought (O’Gorman, 2014). The casinos took advantage of the condition of Mr. Watanabe. An aggrieved party can use drunkenness as defence against the agreement especially where the contract is characterized by fraud (Murray Jr, 2011). If a party in a contract proves intoxication, the contract is voidable.[1] Generally, contracts are affected by intoxication; an individual under the influence of alcohol like Mr. Watanabe is considered lacking in reason thus termed a person non compos mentis during entering of his gaming contracts with Harrah and Caesar casinos. However, as per Lord Corke in the ancient law “as for a drunkard who is voluntaris daemon, he hath (as has been said) no privilege thereby, but what hurt or evil soever he doth, his drunkenness doth aggravate it” ( Ayres et al, 2012).
[1] Wigglesworth v steers & others 4 Hen, and Mun, 70-72 (1806)
Word count: 1017