By performing a contract title, the new shareholder becomes a party to the existing shareholders` agreement and is bound by all the terms of that agreement. Some courts have used more forceful unscrupulous doctrine and declared more unscrupulous clauses. However, this can too often involve too many contractual issues and violate contractual freedom. Other courts have asked the parties to choose the important terms of the contract, and the courts have asked these parties to place these issues in a large field on the first page of the contract. Some have pointed out the problems with this method by wondering how big the box can grow, and wondering what should go in the box. Courts scrutiny membership contracts and sometimes oversee certain provisions due to the possibility of unequal bargaining power, injustice and lack of scruples. Factors that take these decisions into account include the nature of the agreement, the possibility of unfair surprises, the absence of a notice period, unequal bargaining power, and material injustice. Courts often use the « doctrine of reasonable expectations » to justify the nullity of part or all of the contract of adhesion: the weaker party is not required to comply with the contractual terms beyond what the weaker party would reasonably have expected from the contract, even if what they could reasonably expect was outside the strict letter of consent. If the other party has reason to believe that the party expressing such consent would not do so if it knew that the letter contained a particular provision, the provision is not part of the agreement. . .