In law, void means of no legal effect. An action, document or transaction which is void is of no legal effect whatsoever: an absolute nullity - the law treats it as if it had never existed or happened.

The term void ab initio, which means "to be treated as invalid from the outset," comes from adding the Latin phrase ab initio (from the beginning) as a qualifier. For example, in many jurisdictions where a person signs a contract under duress, that contract is treated as being void ab initio.

Black's Law Dictionary defines void as:

“

Void. Null; ineffectual; nugatory; having no legal force or binding effect; unable, in law, to support the purpose for which it was intended. Hardison v Gledhill 72 Ga.App. 432, 33 S.E.2d 671

”

The dictionary further goes on to define void ab initio as:

“

Void ab initio. A contract is null from the beginning if it seriously offends law or public policy in contrast to a contract which is merely voidable at the election of one of the parties to the contract.

”

In practical terms, void is usually used in contradistinction to voidable and unenforceable, the principal difference being that an action which is voidable remains valid until it is avoided. The significance of this usually lies in the possibility of third party rights being acquired. For example, in Cundy v Lindsay (1878) 3 App Cas 459 a fraudster induced Messrs Lindsay & Co to sell to him a quantity of handkerchiefs. The fraudster then sold the handkerchiefs on to an innocent third party, Mr Cundy. The fraudster was convicted, and the money was never recovered from him. Lindsay sued claiming ownership of the handkerchiefs. If the contract of sale was held to be voidable for fraud, the fraudster could pass good title Mr Cundy (provided that the contract had not yet been avoided), and Lindsay & Co would only have recourse against the insolvent fraudster. However, if (as was in fact held) the contract of sale was void ab initio, then title did not pass, and Lindsay could claim back the handkerchiefs as their property, and Mr Cundy was left with only a claim against the insolvent fraudster.

However, the right to avoid a voidable transaction can be lost (usually lost by delay). These are sometimes referred to as "bars to rescission". Such considerations do not apply to matters which are void ab initio.

[edit] References