How does a voidable contract differ from a void contract?

A voidable contract differs from a void contract primarily in the rights it affords the parties involved. In the case of a voidable contract, one party has the option to affirm or reject the contract due to specific circumstances, often involving issues such as misrepresentation, undue influence, or being a minor at the time of contracting. This means that the party who has been wronged or disadvantaged has the option to choose whether to enforce the contract or to nullify it, allowing them to seek remedy or avoid an agreement that is not in their best interest.

On the other hand, a void contract is one that is not legally valid or enforceable from the moment it is created, meaning neither party can enforce the terms of the contract, regardless of the circumstances surrounding its formation. This lack of legal standing stems from factors such as illegality, a lack of capacity to contract, or failure to meet essential elements of a contract.

Understanding these distinctions is crucial in real estate and legal contexts, as it directly impacts how disputes and contractual obligations are managed. The option highlighting the role of a voidable contract in giving the wronged party options captures the essence of its legal standing and the choices available to the parties involved.