Voidable Contract vs Void Agreement

Introduction:
In the realm of contract law, it is important to understand the distinction between voidable contracts and void agreements. While both terms refer to contracts that are unenforceable, they differ in their legal consequences and the circumstances under which they arise.

Voidable Contract:
A voidable contract is a valid contract that can be either affirmed or rejected at the option of one or more parties involved. It means that the contract is initially binding and enforceable, but due to certain legal defects or deficiencies, one party has the right to void or cancel the contract. The party with the option to void the contract can either choose to enforce it or rescind it. Common situations that give rise to voidable contracts include:

1. Mutual mistake: When both parties are mistaken about a fundamental aspect of the contract, such as the subject matter or price.
2. Misrepresentation: When one party makes false statements or conceals material facts to induce the other party to enter into the contract.
3. Fraud: When one party intentionally deceives the other party, resulting in a contract that is disadvantageous to the deceived party.
4. Undue influence: When one party exerts excessive pressure or influence over the other party, making their consent involuntary.
5. Duress: When one party uses threats or coercion to force the other party into entering the contract.

If the party with the right to void the contract chooses to do so, they can rescind the contract and be released from their obligations. However, if the contract is affirmed, it becomes fully enforceable.

Void Agreement:
A void agreement, on the other hand, is a contract that is void ab initio, meaning it is void from the beginning and has no legal effect whatsoever. Unlike a voidable contract, a void agreement is not capable of being ratified or enforced by any party. Some common examples of void agreements include:

1. Agreement with a minor: Contracts entered into with individuals who are under the age of majority are generally void.
2. Agreement made under coercion: If a contract is entered into under the threat of physical harm or other forms of coercion, it is void.
3. Agreement in restraint of marriage: Agreements that restrict a person's freedom to marry are void.
4. Agreement with a person of unsound mind: Contracts entered into with individuals who lack the mental capacity to understand the terms and consequences of the contract are void.
5. Agreement to commit an illegal act: Contracts that involve illegal activities or are against public policy are void.

Since void agreements are considered void ab initio, they are considered null and void, and parties are not bound by any obligations under such agreements.

Conclusion:
In summary, the key distinction between a voidable contract and a void agreement lies in their enforceability. Voidable contracts are initially valid and binding, but one party has the option to void or affirm the contract due to certain legal defects. On the other hand, void agreements are considered void ab initio and have no legal effect from the beginning. It is crucial to understand these concepts to navigate the complex landscape of contract law and ensure that legal rights and obligations are properly upheld.