top of page
  • Writer's pictureLawcian




Void ab initio (literally: void from the beginning) is a Latin sentence that often occurs in some types of legal reasoning. While it sounds deliciously complicated and legal, it has a fairly straightforward meaning, and it can serve just as well as several English phrases. It usually crops up when one party argues that there is no contract or comparable legal document (like a will) available. It serves to signal the form the rest of the argument will take for accomplished practitioners, but to the uninitiated – like most legalese – it serves as a barrier to understanding.

This particular phrase is especially handy since it may be used by either the plaintiff or the defendant, depending on who wants the document in question declared void. It is crucial to note that it is not necessary to simply declare that a text is void ab initio. The party making the statement has to show that the paper is invalid for some actual reason.

For example, a plaintiff may argue that a will ab initio is void for a reason such as forgery, coercion or undue influence. This would prevent execution of the will (because the courts would treat the will as if it did not exist) and the estate would be distributed according to the state 's prior will or intestacy statute. Similarly, a contract could be void ab initio due to unconscionability or unfair dealings, resulting in the entire contract being voided. For similar purposes, a claimant may make use of void ab initio to prohibit the court from requiring results or granting penalties against them.


When a court defines it as an ab initio case, that means that the court's decision on something extends at the moment an act occurs or the conditions were in place with the situation in question, rather than from the time the court ultimately decided on the matter. In many circumstances the term ab initio may be used. It can be void ab initio, which means void from the very beginning, such as an agreement, a law, a deed, etc ... When it is said to be empty ab initio, the object was never produced or empty to start with. In contracts, property and marriages the term void ab initio is often used.

According to the principle, proposition in law within the jurisdiction of a court, because of any vitiating item, a certain document which purports to affect legal rights is or has been null and void from the outset. The maxim says, in contracts, that a contract was invalid as soon as it was made. The contract partners are not legitimately related on the grounds of what was written in the document, as the document in question has never been valid. That form of arrangement will never be invalid as it was never the starting point of a legitimate document. That, however, has several variations. In fact, a contract that is not technically enforceable by either side is declared void.


Originated from “latin” language.


· Contract with a minor is void ab initio

· Illegal contracts are actually void ab initio

· A married C and his 1st wife (B) was alive. C at the time of marriage was unaware of the fact. C has come to hear about A's 1st wives after a couple of months. C lodged a divorce motion, which was not granted because the union was considered void ab initio. The union has been void from the very beginning according to statute, because it is unconstitutional to have more than one wife at a time. Therefore, you don't need a divorce to end a marriage that never was. At the very outset the union was not legally binding, as at the time of his union with C, A was already married to B and she was alive.

· A contract signed for an unlawful or unethical reason is not valid according to law. A pledge to give B $10,000 to ruin land belonging to C. Deal refuses by B. B damages C's land, in compliance with the contract terms; but A fails to pay. In this case, B can not make a petition to the court to enforce the contract, because the contract's intent was unconstitutional. Ab initio the deal is invalid. It had been invalid from the very outset.

A contract signed by a person who is mentally unstable shall be declared void ab initio. If contract success is dependent on any circumstance that cannot happen, then such a contract is often called void ab initio. In brief, from the very beginning, void ab initio implies completely zero or empty. The words void and void ab initio both mean null without any legal force or effect. The word 'evitable' has a different meaning however.


For example, a police officer enters a property under the jurisdiction of a court order that empowers it to capture a rich painting but additionally takes a precious marble sculpture is meant to be at first an interloper. Since the law officer violated the authority of the court, it is possible that he was going to use the authority from the get-go to mask his real intent to get into the property for a wrong purpose.


"Void ab initio" is a phrase that appears in many legal arguments. This is used where one side insists that there is no formal agreement or contract. The use of the term indicates to professional legal practitioners the path the attorney should take to the plaintiff or defendant, but to the unversed, it sounds like any other legal practitioner. The word may either be used by the defendant or the complainant, depending on the party wishing to declare the agreement or contract void.


When a law court decides that ab initio a matter has been the case, it generally means that the decision extends at the point when the act or events involving the case happened or came into force, rather than at the date of the court's judgment. This means that any document declared void ab initio by a court is invalid from the time it was signed, written, or came into effect.


The discovery of the actual evidence about the improper conduct makes the case unconstitutional ab initio (from the very beginning) and not at the stage when the improper / wrong activity has been found or has arisen. Individuals occupying a property legally but behaving illegally have violated their right to be on the premises of the land and are ab initio trespassers.

PROOF OF ASSERTION: It ought to be remembered that pure declaration initially of a document void isn't enough. The suspect or applicant creating the statement should have a justification or adequate proof to indicate the document is fake. for instance, the litigator might claim that the need in question is null and void initially for reasons like

· Undue influence

· Duress

· Forgery

If the claim is true, it will preclude the will from being executed, as the court would find the will non-existent. As such, the estate of the decedent will be distributed in accordance with the provisions of the prior will, or the intestacy statutes of the state. Likewise, due to unfair practices or unconscionability, a contract can be declared void ab initio, resulting in the contract being declared void. Defendants can also use void ab initio so as not to pay damages or compel results against them by a court of law.


In the field of contract law the word "ab initio" is especially relevant. After a contract or agreement has been ruled void ab initio, it cannot be amended or changed to change what is incorrect. This is because the decision of the court states that the contract never existed and, as such, has no legal power on the concerned parties.

For example, where an individual signs an agreement or contract under mistaken premises or coercion, a judge would most likely find the contract to be invalid at the beginning because the person did not have adequate knowledge about the provisions of the contract or had not signed the document or contract under his own free will.


Definition:- "A contract that cannot be upheld by statute may be a void."

Initially it is a valid contract but due to binding purposes it is invalid if either side cannot enforce its formation.

An invalid contract has the following features:-

a. Through statute, it is not enforceable.

b. It doesn't establish lawful property.

c. It does not impose responsibilities on either side.

d. Furthermore, Assist in Nursing Contract which is against the general public policy or other statute is invalid.

e. Any fee can be given to either party under this Agreement.

An arrangement on wedding and trade region unit testing specific samples of vacant deal. If void from the very beginning means null, so voidable means it can be invalidated. If a contract made for an unlawful purpose is void ab initio; a legitimate contract will be declared void, by a negotiating party, for reasons such as deception or misrepresentation, loss of free will or reciprocal mistake. When a party is compelled to enter into a deal, it may seek to make it void. When a negotiating party is a minor, he may opt to void the deal. Therefore, the contract is lawful and binding until one of the parties wants to make it void.

At the very beginning, a void contract is null, while a voidable contract is lawful and valid until one or more parties may agree to vacate it at any time. So it is invalid and unenforceable to enter into a contract for an unlawful reason. A contract like this is known never to have been produced. A voidable contract, therefore, is lawful, legitimate, and enforceable; however it may be voided by one of the contracting parties.

The distinctions between voidable and void ab initio are important to remember. A contract or arrangement is voidable if it includes defects which are necessary to invalidate the contract terms. Such problems may occur during the contract 's lifetime and can be overcome in any variety of ways. Nevertheless, a contract that is void ab initio is viewed as though it never existed.

The same principle extends to relationships which are invalid and voidable. At the very top, a void marriage is null, but a voidable marriage remains lawful and legitimate unless one side wishes to annual it. It occurs for grounds such as theft, misrepresentation, intimidation, etc. A compelled B to marry her, for instance, on pretext of pregnancy. B came to learn about the fake abortion after marriage. B can either annul the marriage or proceed with the marriage. The union is legitimate and valid, as long as B does not request the court to annul it.


MOHIR BIBI V DHARMODAS GHOSH, (1903) 30 Cal. 539, (1903) 30 I.A. 114 (P.C.)

In this case, Privy Council Court ruled for the first time in 1903 that the contract for a minor is void ab initio .


The Supreme Court ruled that Article 13(1) of the Indian Constitution could not refer to that situation (A pamphlet was published in Bombay in September 1949 under the name Railway Mazdooran ke Khilaf Nai Zazish. The appellant was alleged to have committed an offence under the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931. The petioner was taken to justice) because the crime had been perpetrated before the constitution began and, thus, it did not affect the proceedings against the petitioner initiated in 1949. The court observed that past and closed transactions and rights already vested under existing laws would remain untouched at the beginning of the constitution, although the laws could become void under Article 13(1) of the constitution. The court clarified that Article 13(1) did not find the current laws void ab initio or for all purposes which are incompatible with the fundamental rights.


The 1951 U.P. Road Transport Service Act was deemed null and void ab initio. The impugned Act empowered the state government solely or in conjunction with the railway to run and operate the Road Transport Services. The Act was challenged, inter alia, on the ground that it infringed the petitioners' fundamental rights to carry on the transport service business as guaranteed by Article 19(1)(g) and, consequently, was void under Article 13(2) of the Indian Constitution.


In brief, void ab initio is a word widely used in law and it means null right from the start. On the date on which the court finds it void, a voidable contract is invalid; even if a contract is declared void ab initio, it means that the contract has never been legal, or has never existed in the eyes of law.







[DISCLAIMER: This article is for general information only. We have tried to include as much information as possible but there are chances that some important information may have been missed .It is NOT to be substituted for legal advice or taken as legal advice. The publishers of the this article shall not be liable for any act or omission based on this note].

975 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


BY-MEGHANA VUTTARADI (DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY) ABSTRACT Quid pro quo refers in common use to the granting of one important item to another. Quid pro quo has the same definition in


BY-Raja Kumar (Central University of South Bihar) ABSTRACT There are many kinds of languages spoken in the world like Hindi, German, Spanish, Arabic, Latin, English and many more. we often use these k

ULTRA VIRES (Beyond the powers)

By – Surbhi jain (Mohanlal sukhadia university college of law) Power is one such thing that is needed by all, but power is never founded alone and completely. Power comes with a lot of duties and resp


Post: Blog2 Post
bottom of page