Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
According to Paul J. Goda, the distinction between void and voidable marriages arose in the context of a jurisdictional dispute between the civil and ecclesiastical courts. The civil courts held jurisdiction over property matters, while the church retained jurisdiction over the validity of marriages.
Voidable, in law, is a transaction or action that is valid but may be annulled by one of the parties to the transaction. Voidable is usually used in distinction to void ab initio (or void from the outset) and unenforceable .
A difference exists between a void marriage and a voidable marriage. A void marriage is a marriage that was not legally valid under the laws of the jurisdiction where the marriage occurred, and is void ab initio. Although the marriage is void as a matter of law, in some jurisdictions an annulment is required to establish that the marriage is ...
Common reasons that would make a marriage voidable include those that indicate either party to the marriage did not validly consent, such as duress, mistake, intoxication, or mental defect. [ 2 ] The validity of a voidable marriage can only be made by one of the parties to the marriage; thus, a voidable marriage cannot be annulled after the ...
Hence the contract is voidable. Collateral mistakes will not afford the right of rescission. A collateral mistake is one that "does not go to the heart" of the contract. For a mutual mistake to render a contract void, then the item the parties are mistaken about must be material (emphasis added). When there is a material mistake about a ...
For example, an agreement between drug dealers and buyers is a void agreement simply because the terms of the contract are illegal. In such a case, neither party can go to court to enforce the contract. A void agreement is void ab initio, i e from the beginning while a voidable contract can be voidable by one or all of the parties.
A voidable contract, unlike a void contract, is a valid contract which may be either affirmed or rejected at the option of one of the parties. At most, one party to the contract is bound . The unbound party may repudiate (reject) the contract, at which time the contract becomes void .
It is also possible for a contract to be void if there was a mistake in the identity of the contracting party. An example is in Lewis v Averay [2] where Lord Denning MR held that the contract can only be avoided if the plaintiff can show that, at the time of agreement, the plaintiff believed the other party's identity was of vital importance. A ...