Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 1-6 (2026)

Prohibitory law, effect

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§1-6 Prohibitory law, effect. Whatever is done in contravention of a prohibitory law is void, although the nullity be not formally directed. [CC 1859, §8; RL 1925, §8; RL 1935, §8; RL 1945, §7; RL 1955, §1-9; HRS §1-6]

Case Notes

Applied in holding no common law marriage; statutory requisites enforced. 25 H. 397, 403; 34 H. 161, 165. See 295 F. 636.

Statute requiring consent of parent for marriage of certain minors is prohibitory, and marriage without consent will be annulled. 26 H. 89, 95.

Cited and considered in relation to usury statute. 49 H. 160, 184, 413 P.2d 221, reh'g denied. 49 H. 255, 413 P.2d 221; see 36 H. 107, 126.

Referred to: 35 H. 545, 549; 37 H. 374, 378; 39 H. 378, 381; 45 H. 247, 259, 365 P.2d 460.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1966–2020 · leading case: Cvitanovich-Dubie v. Dubie, 254 P.3d 439 (Haw. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cvitanovich-Dubie v. Dubie, 254 P.3d 439 (Haw. 2011). · cites it 8× “" Geraldine further argues that the 11/28/03 Decree is void pursuant to HRS § 1-6, which provides that "[w]hatever is done in contravention of a prohibitory law is void, although the nullity be not formally directed.”

Everson v. State, 228 P.3d 282 (Haw. 2010). · cites it 2× “Act 146, §§ 1-6 at 191-96, the PEHF defined an "employee" as both an active employee of, inter alia, "the state or county government or the legislature" and a "retired member of the employees' retirement system, the county pension system or the police, firefighters, or bandsmen…”

Wick Realty, Inc. v. Napili Sands Maui Corp., 620 P.2d 750 (Haw. App. 1980). “Thus, it is not a prohibitory statute and the provisions of § 1-6, HRS, making the doing of an act in contravention of a prohibitory statute void are not applicable.”

Application of Robinson, 421 P.2d 570 (Haw. 1966). · cites it 2× “[15] While the dates of the awards do not appear in the record transmitted to this court, they necessarily antedated the dissolution of the Land Commission on the last day of March, 1855, pursuant to the Act of July 20, 1854, S.”

Williamson v. Williamson, 144 P.3d 579 (Haw. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “Again, it took over one hundred (100) years from the passage of [the predecessor to HRS § 1-6] for the annulment of a marriage pursuant to [HRS] § 580-21 to *135 be exclusively within the purview of the family court (or designated courts prior to the establishment thereof).”

Moloaa Farms LLC v. Kauai Plan. Comm'n (D. Haw. 2020). · cites it 2× “There is no evidence in the record that the Agenda was served on the Linder Plaintiffs fifteen days prior to the meeting as required pursuant to Kauai Commission Rules of Practice § 1-6- 5. On April 9, 2019, the Kauai Planning Commission held a meeting.”

Christian v. State., 315 P.3d 779 (Haw. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “3d 439 (2011), the Hawai'i Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs argument that her divorce decree was void under Hawai'i Family Court Rules Rule 60(b)(4) because “her marriage was bigamous and therefore violated prohibitory law, and that the marriage was therefore void ah initio…”

Remigio v. Ortiz, 211 P.3d 90 (Haw. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “" HRS § 1-6 (1993). [4] HRS § 480-2 (2008) states currently, as it did when Remigio filed the underlying case, as follows: Unfair competition, practices, declared unlawful.”

Katayama v. Heller-White Hotels Co., 692 F. Supp. 1239 (D. Haw. 1988). · cites it 3× “§ 1-6 which provides that “whatever is done in contravention of a prohibitory law is void, although the nullity be not formally directed.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.