Trisha Shetty (Editor)

Pharmacy Care Systems Ltd v Attorney General

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Citation(s)
  
(2004) 17 PRNZ 308

Date decided
  
August 16, 2004

Pharmacy Care Systems Ltd v Attorney-General

Full case name
  
Pharmacy Care Systems Ltd v Attorney-General

Transcript(s)
  
Court of Appeal judgment

Ruling court
  
Court of Appeal of New Zealand

Judge sittings
  
John McGrath, Grant Hammond, Mark O'Regan

Pharmacy Care Systems Ltd v Attorney-General (2004) 17 PRNZ 308 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding the seven elements of duress.

Contents

Background

Pharmacy Care set up a high volume, low margin service to supply government institutions. One of these institutions was the Northern Regional Health Authority commonly referred to as "North Health".

Problems later developed when North Health discovered that PCS was recycling drugs, i.e. billing North Health for supply, unused drugs that had been previously returned by institutions, that North Health had previously paid for.

This resulted in North Health calling in an investigator, as well as with holding monies it owed from Pharmacy Care.

To resolve the matter, Pharmacy Care agreed to enter into a Deed of Settlement, agreeing to refund $80,000 to North Health.

However, 3 1/2 years later, Pharmacy Care sought to have the Deed of Settlement set aside, claiming it was entered into as the result of duress by North Health, claiming they threatened a fraud prosecution if it was not accepted.

Held

The Court of Appeal found no evidence that North Health had threatened a fraud prosecution. And even if it had found such evidence, the delay of 3 1/2 years in challenging the agreement amounted to affirmation of the contract.

References

Pharmacy Care Systems Ltd v Attorney-General Wikipedia