The working philosophy behind this section is that, if the illegal clause can be dissociated from the contract, the entire contract is not considered void, but only the illegal part is considered void and the rest of the contract is considered valid, but if the illegal clause cannot be dissociated from the legal part, the entire contract is considered illegal.  There are many ways to invalidate a contract. If a party has no legal access, it will not be legally able to accept a contract. This may include one of the persons who enter into the contract while unable to work or is unable to obtain a correct judgment. This article applies only if the restriction imposed on the party on the right to sue is an “absolute”, that is, an agreement that completely prevents a party from filing its remedies is affected only by article 28, but if an agreement had a partial limitation, it will be considered a valid agreement.  Treaties such as this therefore aim to restrict human rights, which in the Constitution have the meaning of fundamental rights, on the basis of which they are considered null and void treaties. Well, the effect of the conditions of appeal of invalid contracts is that it would mean that the contract never existed and that neither party has to perform any obligations related to this contract. Article 36 of the Partnership Act allows the remaining partners to prevent the outgoing partner from opening similar stores at a given location, provided that the restrictions are appropriate. Similarly, article 54 of the Partnership Act stipulates that in the event of dissolution of the company, a similar agreement may be concluded by all the partners, by which they may prevent themselves from opening operations of the same nature as the dissolved company. A contract may be considered invalid if the contract is not applicable in its original version.. . . .