Definition
Rescissio is a Latin term drawn from Roman civil law, meaning the annulment, avoidance, or making void of a legal act, obligation, or instrument. It encompasses the formal undoing of what had been legally constituted — rendering the act or agreement as though it had never existed. The term is the civil law antecedent to the modern common law concept of rescission and appears in historical legal sources as a technical term of Roman and civilian jurisprudence, not as a term of art in contemporary Anglo-American practice.
The concept operated through various civil law mechanisms, including the actio rescissoria (an action to undo a transaction) and related equitable remedies recognized under Roman law, such as relief granted to a minor who suffered loss in a transaction (restitutio in integrum). The Code of Justinian, Title 4.44, provides the classical textual basis for the doctrine as referenced in the historical dictionaries.
---
Common Confusion
Rescissio should not be confused with rescission as used in modern contract law, though the two are directly related by lineage. Rescissio is a Roman civil law term with specific procedural and doctrinal connotations within that system. Modern rescission, as applied in common law jurisdictions, has been shaped by centuries of equity jurisprudence and statutory development, and operates under distinct rules regarding grounds, effect, and remedy. Researchers encountering rescissio in historical texts should not assume that the civil law doctrine maps cleanly onto contemporary rescission doctrine. Similarly, rescissio should be distinguished from abrogatio (legislative repeal of a statute) and from annullatio, though historical sources sometimes use these terms interchangeably in translation.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Rescissio is a term researchers will encounter almost exclusively in three contexts: historical civil law treatises, comparative law scholarship, and older Anglo-American legal dictionaries that preserve civilian vocabulary. It does not appear as operative language in modern American or English cases or statutes.
The primary research trap is terminological collapse: historical translators and early common law writers frequently rendered rescissio simply as "rescission," obscuring the doctrinal distance between the civilian concept and its common law descendant. When reading works by civilian-influenced writers — Pothier, Domat, or their English translators — rescissio and its derivatives carry the full weight of Roman procedural assumptions that do not travel intact into equity or contract law.
Burrill's citation to Pothier's Treatise on the Contract of Sale (num. 331) is particularly significant for researchers working on the history of sales law and the transmission of civilian doctrine into common law through Pothier's influence on both French and Anglo-American contract theory. Pothier's treatment of rescissio in the sales context shaped how early American courts reasoned about voidable contracts, fraud in the inducement, and the right to undo completed transactions.
Researchers tracing the doctrinal genealogy of modern rescission doctrine — especially in connection with minority, fraud, duress, or lesion — will find rescissio a useful entry point into the civilian tradition that underlies much of that doctrine, even where the civilian label has been dropped.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
The three source dictionaries are in close agreement, which is itself informative: rescissio was treated as a settled term of civilian art requiring little elaboration in the Anglo-American context. Black's (both editions) and Burrill's give nearly identical core definitions — annulling, avoiding, making void, abrogation, rescission — and all three cite the same locus in the Codex Justinianus (Cod. 4, 44). Burrill adds the Pothier citation and supplies the Latin root (rescindere, to annul or avoid), which is the most substantive addition across the three sources.
What the historical dictionaries do not do is explain the mechanics of how rescissio operated in Roman law — the distinction between void and voidable acts, the procedural vehicles through which rescission was sought, or the conditions (such as laesio enormis, or gross disproportion in price) that could trigger the remedy. Researchers needing that doctrinal depth must go beyond the dictionary sources to civilian treatises and Roman law scholarship. The dictionary entries function as vocabulary pointers, not doctrinal guides.
None of the three sources attempt to map rescissio onto contemporary common law categories, which reflects the appropriate scholarly restraint of the period: these dictionaries understood the term as belonging to a foreign legal system and presented it as such.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Rescissio is not operative terminology in any U.S. or English jurisdiction today. It survives as a historical and comparative law term. Louisiana, with its civilian heritage, provides the closest domestic jurisdiction where the underlying concepts of the Roman tradition remain most directly relevant, though even Louisiana courts use "rescission" rather than rescissio in contemporary practice.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia — Rescission (for modern doctrine and its historical development); Roman Law of Contracts (for the civilian framework within which rescissio operated); Restitutio in Integrum (for the related civil law remedy).
---