The concept of nullity in relation to breach of the rules of natural justice

Abstract

This thesis is about the use of terms "void" and "voidable" in Administrative Law with particular emphasis on breach of the rules of natural Justice. A South African Judge once said that the task of trying to differentiate between void and voidable decisions was similar to "blind men looking in a dark room for a black cat which wasn't there" Van den Heever J. in Van der Westhuizen v. Engelbrecht [1942] O.P.D. 191, 199 - cited by Eekelaar in a casenote on Durayappah v. Fernando [1967] 2 A.C. 337 (P.C.) appearing in (1967) 30 M.L.R. 701, and entitled "Breach of Natural Justice: Void or Voidable?". More recently in 1963 in the now famous case of Ridge v. Baldwin, Lord Evershed had this to say of the disctinction, speaking in a specifically Administrative Law context:- Indeed, in the vast majority of circumstances, it does not in the end matter whether the decision challenged is void or only voidable; for if the court does decide to quash a decision or otherwise set it aside, then the effect is in general the same whether such decision be considered as void or only voidable [1964] A.C. 40, 86 (H.L.).