General Rules on Invalidity of Contracts in Serbia

The effective Serbian Law on Obligations in the most part retained general rules invalidity of contracts from former federal 1978. explicitly differentiates two categories invalid contracts: null and void contracts, one hand, voidable other. Whereas legal consequences both are principally same, restitutio integrum, have some other, more stringent as well. important is ban restitution performance party who acted bad faith, which cases when contract grossly violates good morals may be supplemented by forfeiture object performance. Obligations, namely, still contains rule 1978, according to court order faith transfer his/her municipality residence or domicile.
 Voidable considered with flawed contractual intention, such concluded mistake, deceit under threat. In addition, minors older than 14 years without consent their natural guardian, adults whose capacity not completely excluded, but only partially reduced, outside guardian. Furthermore, since leasio a case mistake making intention flawed, remedy also voidability contract.
 Under law, void, if it infringes public order, imperative morals, unless something else prescribed law purpose infringed implies different remedy. illegality immorality scrutinised through its (content) cause. Aside these rules, specifically qualifies usurious null. Yet, there several means „saving” invalidity, primarily performance, convalidation partial invalidity. 
 Non-existent clearly distinguished doctrine, questionable whether envisages separate regime applicable this category, distinct contracts. uses wording certain had been at all. However, pertaining refers avoidable doctrinal standpoints differ non-existent could implied regardless that no specific set exists.