Which of the following best represents duress in contract law?

Duress in contract law refers to a situation where one party coerces another into entering a contract through some form of pressure or threat. This could involve physical threats, psychological pressure, or economic duress, all of which compromise the voluntary nature of consent that is essential for a valid contract.

When a party signs a contract under threat or extreme pressure, they do not truly have the freedom to make a choice, thus undermining the validity of the agreement. This means that the contract may be voidable, allowing the coerced party to seek legal relief, as they were not acting out of their own free will.

The other options are not representative of duress. Entering into a contract freely, without any external pressure, indicates that there is genuine mutual consent. Accidental miscommunication does not involve coercion or pressure that would invalidate consent. Lastly, mutual benefit in an agreement doesn’t indicate any form of duress; rather, it suggests that both parties willingly engaged in the contract on terms they both find acceptable.