Equity
Equity is a specific set of legal principles which add to those provided in the common law. Equity
was developed because of the problems with the common law.
Development of equity & conflict between equity and common law
Common law was the main legal system before equity was developed. They were unwritten
laws that were developed through customs and judicial decisions. Common law had problems
like only recognising certain types of cases and being very technical. Additionally, common law
only provided ‘damages’ as remedy.
When common law did not provide justice, The King’s Chancellor would make his decisions
based on principles of natural justice and fairness, looking beyond legal documents and taking
account of both parties’ intentions. The Chancellor used new procedures such as subpoenas,
which orders a witness to attend court or risk imprisonment. Eventually, A Court of Chancery
was formed under the Chancellor’s control in 1474.
The conflict between common law and equity was due to the overlapping of both systems. One
of the conflicts was when the common law and Court of Chancery favoured a different party of
the same case. This was resolved during the 1615 Earl of Oxford’s case when the king decided
that equity should prevail. This rule was also included in s25 of the Judicature Act 1873.
Operation of equity (equitable maxims)
There are many important equitable maxims developed, this included, he who comes to equity
must come with clean hands. This was applied in the D&C Builders Ltd v Rees, whereby the
Rees refused to pay the remaining £182, claiming the renovation work had not been done
properly, knowing of the builders financial difficulty. Lord Denning refused to apply the doctrine
of promissory estoppel as the Rees’ did not come with clean hands.
Another important maxim is Delay defeats equity. This is shown in Leaf v International
galleries, Although there was no fraud involved, there was a gap of 5 years before the painting
sold was discovered to not be Constable’s. Therefore, rescission was not granted because of
the delay.
Lastly, He who seeks equity must do equity. This was shown in Chappel v Times Newspaper
Ltd, where 6 employees applied for an injunction to prevent their employers from terminating
their employment contracts due to an industrial dispute but it was not granted as the employees
refused to stop their strike.
Equitable remedies
Equity also created new remedies to supplement the common law remedy. An equitable remedy
is only granted where the court thinks it is fair in all the circumstances. The court can fine or
imprison a party if they ignore an equitable remedy.
Equity is a specific set of legal principles which add to those provided in the common law. Equity
was developed because of the problems with the common law.
Development of equity & conflict between equity and common law
Common law was the main legal system before equity was developed. They were unwritten
laws that were developed through customs and judicial decisions. Common law had problems
like only recognising certain types of cases and being very technical. Additionally, common law
only provided ‘damages’ as remedy.
When common law did not provide justice, The King’s Chancellor would make his decisions
based on principles of natural justice and fairness, looking beyond legal documents and taking
account of both parties’ intentions. The Chancellor used new procedures such as subpoenas,
which orders a witness to attend court or risk imprisonment. Eventually, A Court of Chancery
was formed under the Chancellor’s control in 1474.
The conflict between common law and equity was due to the overlapping of both systems. One
of the conflicts was when the common law and Court of Chancery favoured a different party of
the same case. This was resolved during the 1615 Earl of Oxford’s case when the king decided
that equity should prevail. This rule was also included in s25 of the Judicature Act 1873.
Operation of equity (equitable maxims)
There are many important equitable maxims developed, this included, he who comes to equity
must come with clean hands. This was applied in the D&C Builders Ltd v Rees, whereby the
Rees refused to pay the remaining £182, claiming the renovation work had not been done
properly, knowing of the builders financial difficulty. Lord Denning refused to apply the doctrine
of promissory estoppel as the Rees’ did not come with clean hands.
Another important maxim is Delay defeats equity. This is shown in Leaf v International
galleries, Although there was no fraud involved, there was a gap of 5 years before the painting
sold was discovered to not be Constable’s. Therefore, rescission was not granted because of
the delay.
Lastly, He who seeks equity must do equity. This was shown in Chappel v Times Newspaper
Ltd, where 6 employees applied for an injunction to prevent their employers from terminating
their employment contracts due to an industrial dispute but it was not granted as the employees
refused to stop their strike.
Equitable remedies
Equity also created new remedies to supplement the common law remedy. An equitable remedy
is only granted where the court thinks it is fair in all the circumstances. The court can fine or
imprison a party if they ignore an equitable remedy.
