本文提出我国合同法应该正式承认经济胁迫的存在，从而向一些被不道德协商手段所影响的受害人提供一种救济。本文提供了有关普通法下胁迫的历史简述，显示出在其发展期间，改造胁迫制度的主要驱动力是为了遏制在双方交易中不公正的手段。最重要的是，胁迫这概念，延伸至经济胁迫，有一种变移性让其通过司法解释能够跟随着当代对于“不当”的解析的变化而改变。然而，判定胁迫很大程度地依赖着法院对于事实的解析，因而整理及分析普通法案例将有助于我国对胁迫的理解及运用。经济胁迫可以在合同任何一个阶段发生，不论是成立阶段，变更阶段或解除阶段。在经济胁迫中，有六个事实元素或会呈现。在其中，以其他可行选择的存在及不当的胁迫行为对判断经济胁迫是否真的存在最为适合。引入经济胁迫将是现代化我国法律的自然过程。现实行的《民通意见》依然将胁迫局限于人身、财产及声誉内。相对而言，缺少了这一项可以鼓励良好协商手段的制度，对于鼓励合同双方得益这合同法原则，是一种伤害。我国法下，胁迫与乘人之危及显失公平的情况有着明显的重叠，但这可以从建立明确的界限来解决。胁迫与乘人之危之间以胁迫者当时的过失为界限，换言之，界限在于被害者是否因被告的行为而处于危难之中抑或被告者仅是乘机地利用被害者的难处得益？显失公平则提供一项“兜底”的方法，管治任何一项不被经济胁迫或乘人之危管治的严重不公平的交易。
This paper proposes a formal recognition of the doctrine of economic duress in PRC contract law so as to offer a remedy for those wronged by unethical negotiation tactics. A historical account of the doctrine under common law is provided to reveal that throughout its development, curbing injustices in exchanges between two parties has been a major driving force behind the advancement of the doctrine. Most importantly, however, it is submitted that the concept of duress, and by extention economic duress, has been a fluid concept adapting to the notion of “illegitimacy” prevailing at the time through judicial interpretations. It relies heavily on the interpretation of facts making a throrough survey and analysis of the common law case laws fruitful to the understanding and application of the doctrine in PRC law. Economic duress can happen at any stage of a contractual relationship. It may concern the formation, modification or discharge of the contract. In a case of economic duress, there are six factual elements that can present. Of those, the availability of an alternative option and the illegitimatcy of the threat remain to be the most appropriate deciding factors on the question of whether economic duress is operative.Introducing economic duress will be natural course in modernizing the PRC law. The current interpretation of duress under the General Principles of Civil Law limits the subject of threats to threats to person, property and reputation only. Comparatively speaking, this lacks the availability of a concept that aids in the encouragement of good behaivours in negotiation harms the promotion of mutually beneficial transactions, which is one of the goals of contract law. Under PRC laws, the overlap between duress, exploitation of one’s pecunious situation and manifest disadvantages can be solved by declaring clear boundaries between the concepts. The boundary between economic duress and exploitation seems to be the fault of the plaintiff, whether he was the cause of the difficult situation faced by the plaintiff or simply a person who took advantage of a difficult situation that is already present. Manifest disadvantage provides a “catch-all” concept that deals with any transaction that is gravely unfair that could not be dealt with by economic duress or exploitation.
