Agreement Opposed To Public Policy Definition

In simple terms, pubic policy refers to the policy of the government for the good of society, It can also be said that if an agreement against a developed interest of society or morals of the time, it can be said that against public order and the agreement will be considered invalid. It was held that an agreement could not be applied if it was contrary to the public interest [ii] or contrary to general legal policy. In the case of P. Rathinam v. Union of Idnia[iv], the Apex court held that the notion of public order is open to changes and enlargement example: A obtained a loan from B, a money lender and agreed with B that, without B`s consent in writing, he would not quit his job, or borrow money, or sell his property, or change his residence. It was found that the agreement was inconclusive. In England, both agreements are illegal and unenforceable. However, in India, only agreements that appear to be entered into for gambling purposes in disputes and for breaches or to repress others, by encouraging lay litigation, are not enforced, but not all support and championship agreements are enforced. When an agreement restricts the statute of limitations, it is anniated. Because their goal is to defeat the legal provisions.

Two types of agreements are dealt with under this head. It is a vague and unsatisfactory term „public policy“ that must lead to uncertainty and error when applied to the rights decision; it is capable of being understood in different senses; it can and does mean „political expediency“ or what is best for the common good of the Community; and in this sense, there may be any variety of opinions, depending on the education, habits, talents and inclinations of any person who must decide whether an action is contrary to public order or not. Admitting it as a reason for a judicial decision would lead to greater uncertainty and confusion. It is the province of the statesman, not the lawyer, to discuss and determine to the legislature what is best for the common good, and to guarantee it by appropriate decrees. It is the province of the judge to declare only the law; written from the statutes; the unwritten or universal right of the decisions of our predecessors and our existing courts, the authority recognized by the authors of texts and the principles that must be clearly established for reasonable reasons and only conclusions; Do not speculate on what it considers best, for the benefit of the Community. Some of these decisions may be based on the prevailing and just views of the common good; z.B the illegality of alliances to restrict marriage or trade. They are part of the recognized law, and that is why we are connected to it, but it does not allow us to define everything we think for the common good as a law and to prohibit everything we think differently. An agreement to restrict the marriage of persons who do not have minors is null and void.