Contract Unconscionability and Unfair Bargain Doctrines

Contract Unconscionability and Unfair Bargain Doctrines groups the doctrines that police contracts and contract terms formed through a serious imbalance of bargaining power, following the standard form contract, sometimes referred to as a contract of adhesion, a leonine contract, or a boilerplate contract, in which one party sets the terms and conditions of the contract and the other party has little or no ability to negotiate more favorable terms, leaving that party in a take-it-or-leave-it position. A standard form contract is not illegal in itself, but the imbalance it embodies carries a real potential for unconscionability, and where an ambiguity arises within such a contract, courts resolve it contra proferentem, against the party who drafted the contract language. This node gathers the atlas's own entities illustrating this family of bargaining-power and fairness doctrines, from the general doctrine of unconscionability itself to the specific mechanisms, such as severing an unenforceable clause under the blue pencil doctrine, that courts use to police an unfair bargain.