Answer:
substantive unconscionability.
Explanation:
This unreasonable terms of contract in the given context is a case of 'substantive unconscionability'.
It refers that the objective terms of a contract is not fair and equal. Substantive unconscionability is an outcome of a harsh and excessively oppressive contract terms.
Here in the context, Red had to made a contract with Megaworks as he was in urgent need of a material. Megaworks taking advantage of this, sold Red the material at an excessive price and also succeeded to sell Red some unwanted material.
Thus Megaworks entered into a harsh contract with Red and sold the material unfairly at a very huge price.
Hence the answer is ---
substantive unconscionability.