显失公平、非法性与对价
程序性与实质性不合情理的判断标准 (Unconscionability)
法院在认定合同是否构成不合情理 (Unconscionability) 时，通常要求证明该合同在订立时同时具备程序性 (Procedural) 和实质性 (Substantive) 的不合情理因素。
实质性不合情理
(Substantive Unconscionability)
核心考量：
合同条款对一方
极度有利 / 显失公平
(terms which are unreasonably favorable to the other party)
程序性不合情理
(Procedural Unconscionability)
法院考量的合同形成过程因素：

- 🏢
  1. 交易规模与商业环境 (size and commercial setting)
- 🚫
  2. 缺乏有意义的选择 (lack of meaningful choice)
- ⚠️
  3. 欺骗或高压手段 (deceptive or high-pressured tactics)
- 🔍
  4. 附属细则 / 小字条款 (fine print)
- 🎓
  5. 经验与教育背景差异 (experience and education)
- ⚖️
  6. 议价能力悬殊 (disparity in bargaining power)

参考判例: Gillman v Chase Manhattan Bank, 73 NY2d 1, 11 [1988]