Complete dependence upon a trusted adviser for financial advice can constitute a 'special disability' for the purposes of the unconscionable dealing doctrine, equivalent to emotional dependence recognised in Louth v Diprose and Bridgewater v Leahy. An exorbitant interest rate in a loan agreement (here, 18% per month / 216% per annum) is of itself a strong indicator that a guarantor's interests are not being protected and may raise in the mind of a reasonable financier the possibility that the guarantor is under a special disability. The knowledge requirements for Barnes v Addy knowing assistance should not be applied to unconscionable dealing claims.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.