The “reasonable person test” is legal principle, a means of evaluating behaviour in various legal contexts.

However, there are instances when behaviour emerges that is so egregiously unfair, it not only contravenes social norms but also strikes at the heart of good conscience.

This behaviour, often termed “unconscionable conduct,” represents actions that defy principles of fairness and morality.

The courts may use “reasonable person test” for evaluating whether someone’s actions align with a standard of reasonableness in a given situation.

And we all know what happens when lawyers mess with language and grammar.

At its core, fairness involves treating others with equity, respect, and compassion, fostering a sense of reciprocity. Individuals expect to receive treatment commensurate with what they give.

Yet, when such balance is disrupted by acts of blatant unfairness, it undermines societal cohesion and erodes trust between individuals and institutions.

Dishonesty and deceit also stand as stark examples of behaviour in direct conflict with good conscience. Actions such as lying, cheating, or manipulation of language for personal gain, undermine trust and integrity.

“Good Conscience” vs. “Unconscionable Conduct”

“Unconscionable conduct” is behaviour that’s so unreasonable or unfair it shocks the conscience or violates principles of fairness and justice. It often exploits power imbalances or vulnerabilities, disregarding ethical considerations and potentially breaching legal or moral standards.

On the other hand, “good conscience” reflects a moral integrity that guides one’s actions with compassion and fairness. It aligns with principles of what is right and wrong, which may have nothing to do with “justice”.

Thus, while the “reasonable person test” serves as a means of evaluating behaviour in various legal contexts, including unconscionable conduct.

What A Reasonable Person Expects?

This “reasonable person test” applies in various areas of law, such as negligence, contracts, and criminal law, to determine whether someone’s actions meet the expected standard of care or behaviour.

Essentially, it asks whether the person acted as a reasonably prudent individual would in the same circumstances.

In Australia, the “reasonable person test” applies to “unconscionable conduct” primarily under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), part of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.

The Corporations Act uses the term “reasonable person test” to judge conduct in the eyes of ordinary men and women. This test assesses whether a person’s conduct would be considered reasonable by an ordinary person in similar circumstances. It is often applied in determining various legal standards, including directors’ duties and obligations under corporate law.

When assessing whether conduct is unconscionable under the ACL, the courts often consider the following situation:

1. with the same knowledge and
2. in the same circumstances as the parties involved,
3. Would a reasonable person consider the conduct to be unconscionable.

Smoke and Mirrors

The “reasonable person test” evaluates actions for reasonableness, yet the definitions are very vague, and offer a smorgasbord of word-salad for moolah-chasing lawyers.

Most ordinary men and women you meet in the street still have a moral compass, and are smart enough to know “right” from “wrong”. But as we all know, that’s not what the “Justice System” or the “Courts” are about.

It seems that “Dishonesty” is the new “honesty”… which undermines trust and integrity.

Around the globe, “service corporations” in the guise of banks, and governments, prioritise personal gain over decency, as demonstrated in the UK’s huge Post Office Limited scandal.

“Unconscionable conduct” defies fairness and morality, and “fairness” means equitable, respectful treatment. Yet exploitation and manipulation of grammar by lawyers and courts still harm vulnerable groups.

The “reasonable person test” assesses behaviour, and should underline integrity and empathy, while “Good conscience” reflects moral integrity.

Now is the time to make a stand, and learn how to protect yourself against the rampant abusive behaviour of global “service corporations”.

Learn how to identify the use of fraudulent grammar in all Acts, Statutes, Codes, Rules and Regulations that are enslaving people all around the world.

You simply have to be able to prove it. Get started here