In this paper, the authors discuss apparent contracts as regulated by Article 285 paragraph 1 of the Croatian Civil Obligations Act as a cause of either the nullity or the inexistence of the contract. In several recent decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia, one can notice the standpoint that apparent contracts are not null contracts, but inexistent contracts. The aforementioned standpoint resulted in the rejection of many claims for the determination of nullity of apparent contracts. Therefore, in the first part of the paper, the authors analyze the subject case-law, as well as apparent contracts in Croatian and comparative law. At the same time, inexistent contracts have been the subject of discussion exclusively from the point of view of legal theory. The second part of the paper is consequently focused on the analysis of inexistent contracts, their practical value and their comparison to null contracts. The authors also give specific attention to the difference between the moment of entering into a contract and the creation of the contract’s legal effects, as well as the need for the differentiation between legal consequences of contracts that are not formed, contracts that are not entered into, contracts that do not produce legal effects and contracts that are explicitly null. In the conclusion, the authors discuss the practical necessity of distinguishing null and inexistent contracts and propose de lege ferenda suggestions for normative improvement of the Civil Obligations Act in the part that pertains to contracts with no legal effect.