Equity and Common Law - Research Paper Example

BUSINESS LAW Creation of Equity Equity (in law) was created during England in the 13th century when the people tried to obtain justice from the courts but couldn't due to too much power was given to the court judges. If a person wanted to remove another person who had wrongfully entered the land, then a petition to the court was given and the judges decided upon dispossession or monetary payment of 'writ' to the entry process. Since the judges could invent new writs any time they wanted, the Parliament decided to allow the judges writ one at a time. This system was unjust since even with the King's Bench having power over a case, the plaintiff might still not win if there was not a single form of action that combined the jurisdiction and power of the King's Bench. People's only choice was to petition to the King. Later on the system was changed and then the people's petitions were sent to the Lord Chancellor to deal with. (Development of Law Website) According to the Law Site, the petitions usually alleged that The common law was defective The remedy of the common law courts was ineffective and unsatisfactory That the defendant was too powerful and had control over the court and jurors or That the court lacked jurisdiction in certain areas of the law. Soon enough the law of equity and the common law started to conflict. The fictional case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce in Bleak House written by Charles Dickens is one classic example of such a case. Litigants would go 'jurisdiction shopping' and often would seek an equitable injunction prohibiting the enforcement of a common law court order. The penalty for disobeying an equitable 'common injunction' and enforcing a common law judgment was imprisonment. (Cockburn & Shirley, 2005) The resolution of the conflict came in the Earl of Oxford's case in 1615 where a judgment of Coke CJ was allegedly obtained by fraud. The Lord Chancellor had issued a common injunction out of the Chancery prohibiting the enforcement of the common law order locking the two courts in a stalemate. Attorney-General at that time, Sir Francis Bacon, upheld the use of the common injunction and concluded that in the event of any conflict between the common law and the equity, equity would prevail. Thus the people's petitions were started to be dealt justly. Later in 1870, Equity and Common Law court's administration were fused in England in the Judicature Acts of the 1870s into one unified court system. (Cockburn & Shirley, 2005) Equity Generally Equity means fairness. But according to the English law it refers to the body of rules originally enforced only by the Court of the Chancery. It is referred to as a supplement to the common law since it fills in the gaps and makes the English legal system more complete. According to the Farlex Encyclopedia it is defined as a "System of law supplementing the ordinary rules of law where the application of these would operate harshly in a particular case". Sometimes it is regarded as an attempt to achieve 'natural justice'. Equity created new rights and as a result of it new procedures were introduced such as the right to subpoena and discovery of documents. The rich nobles resented equity because of the reduction in their incomes. There were advantages that came with it, though, because it was less rigid and formal than the common law resulting in more flexibility. It was a fairer system because it dealt with cases on their merit. A defect was that it lacked certainty and varied from chancellor to chancellor and because overburdened and slow moving. (The Law Site) Differences with Common Law England was working with the equity law court and the common law court as described above. The Common Law Courts could only award monetary rewards and damages and it only recognized the legal owner of property. On the other hand the Equity Law Courts could issue injunctive relief and recognized trusts of property. This distinction between common law and equity was categorized and prioritized the rights to property. It further helped in determining whether the Seventh Amendment's right to a jury trial applies or whether the issue may be decided by a judge. In case of grants of equitable remedies these principles were also applied. (Cockburn & Shirley, 2005) Today the most important distinction between law and equity is still the set of remedies each law offers. The most common remedy a court of law can award is money damages. Equity, however, enters injunctions or decrees directing someone either to act or to forbear from acting. Often this form of relief is in practical terms more valuable to a litigant. A plaintiff who installed solar panels to generate electricity from sunlight ordered a case against his neighbour. The neighbour had built a fence around his house blocking the sunlight. The plaintiff was adjudged to have a common law right to the sunshine and the neighbour lost the case. (Development of Law Website) Another distinction is that in an equity law situation, the judges use their common sense and fairness to try the cases. No jury is available to the judge. Another important distinction between law and equity is the source of the rules governing the decisions. In the case of common law, decisions are made by reference to legal doctrines or statutes. On the other hand equity has only general guides known as the maxims of equity. As stated above, law of equity was criticized since it has no fixed rules of its own with the Lord Chancellor from time to time judging in the main according to his own conscience. (Cockburn & Shirley, 2005) One final distinction between "legal" and "equitable" relief is based on the type of relief the plaintiff requests. If a plaintiff requests damages in the form of money or property, the remedy is considered legal and the jury decides the outcome of the case. On the other hand, if the plaintiff requests an injunction, declaratory judgment, specific performance or modification of contract, or other non-monetary relief, the claim would usually be one in equity. (Cockburn & Shirley, 2005) Present Relationship between Common Law and Equity In England, courts of law and equity were combined by the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875, with equity being supreme in case of conflict. The present relationship between the courts of law and courts of equity are still subject to the right of either party to request a jury, and equity issues to be decided by a judge. Here is a list of present relationships stated by The Law Site Equity and Common Law is administered side by side in all courts Equity had precedence over the common law because its degrees applied to the person of the defendant and disobedience to a decree was a contempt of court. Oral evidence can be given in court And, the rules of the Supreme Court of Judicature are formulated with regard to procedural matters Works Cited Cockburn, T., & Shirley, M. (2005), "Equity in a Nutshell", Lawbook Co, Sydney "Common Law and Equity", The Law Site, Available at , Accessed on October 17, 2007 "Equity (law)", Farlex Free Dictionary, Available at , Accessed on October 17, 2007 "The Development of Law and Equity", Learn About Law, Available at , Accessed on October 17, 2007 Read More