What is presumed in Queensland regarding inducement after a threat?

In Queensland, the law recognizes that when a threat is made, the presumption is that inducement follows that threat. This is grounded in the understanding that a threat can significantly influence a person's decision-making, creating a situation where the person feels compelled to act against their will or better judgment. The presumption of inducement following a threat supports the idea that consent or decisions made under duress are not genuinely voluntary.

This presumption is crucial in legal contexts because it shifts the burden of proof to the party making claims based on the purported consent or agreement following such threats. In practical terms, this means that if a threat can be established, the law assumes that the decision made by the threatened party was induced by that threat unless evidence is presented to the contrary. Thus, in cases where inducement is a central issue, the presence of a threat creates a legal environment that favors the understanding that the individual was influenced, reinforcing the principle that freedom of will is compromised in such circumstances.