1. If a person exploits another's pressing need, manifest recklessness, overpowering desire, lack of experience, apparent weakness, or exploits their moral authority over them, and thereby induces them to conclude, for their own benefit or for the benefit of another, a contract that at the time of its conclusion entails a gross disparity between what they are obliged to perform thereunder and the material or moral benefit accruing thereto, the aggrieved party may request the annulment of the contract or the reduction of their obligation. The other contracting party may avert the annulment of the contract by offering what the court deems sufficient to remove the unfairness. 2. In contracts of donation, the donor may, upon proof of exploitation, request the court to annul the contract or reduce the amount of the donated property. 3. A claim of exploitation shall not be admissible after the lapse of one year from the date of conclusion of the contract; provided that if the defect giving rise to the exploitation is continuous, the one-year period shall not begin until the date of the removal of this defect. In all cases, the claim shall lapse upon the expiry of three (3) years from the date of conclusion of the contract.
Interpretation and application must be checked against the official text and current version.