Contract law
Void vs voidable contract
A void contract has no legal effect from the outset — in law it never existed — whereas a voidable contract is valid and binding unless and until the innocent party chooses to set it aside (rescind it).
Last reviewed 14 June 2026
| Aspect | Void | Voidable |
|---|---|---|
| Legal status | No contract ever existed | Valid and binding until avoided |
| Typical cause | Fundamental mistake; illegality | Misrepresentation; duress; undue influence |
| Passing of title | No title to goods passes | Title passes unless and until the contract is rescinded |
| Third-party rights | A third party acquires no title | A good-faith third party can acquire good title before rescission |
Key cases
- Cundy v Lindsay (1878) 3 App Cas 459
- Phillips v Brooks Ltd [1919] 2 KB 243
- Car & Universal Finance Co Ltd v Caldwell [1965] 1 QB 525
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a void and a voidable contract?
A void contract never had legal effect; a voidable contract is valid until the wronged party rescinds it.
Why does the void/voidable distinction matter for third parties?
Under a voidable contract a good-faith buyer can obtain good title before it is rescinded; under a void contract no title ever passes.
Revising contract law for an exam?
Get structured revision notes and timed SQE1 practice covering Void vs voidable contract.
Revising law for an exam?
Get the free “50 Must-Know Cases for UK Law Exams” guide — grouped by module with the ratio for each, sent to your inbox.