Sunday, May 12, 2019
Equity in legal system origin, development and significance Essay
Equity in lawful frame origin, growing and significance - Essay exemplificationToday equity apparently has lost its significant correlation to justice, as rules of equity are settled in much the same way as the coarse law.2 However creations of equity such as including the rights, interests and remedies continue to be of significance in English legal system3The paper attempts to understand the origin and development of equity as a source of law in the English legal system and dismember the significance of rules of equity and equitable doctrines and remedies in legal proceedings today. While analyzing the significance of equity, it would be haughty to understand its percepts as well as the principles and remedies of equity hence a discussion on the same is also included.The historical origin of equity in English legal system dates back to the of late 13th and 14th centuries. The English legal system of the time - the common law system create by the judges on the basis of un written customary rules and precedents or past judicial decisions - were really rigid and too technical with the procedures such as the writ. The procedural compliance and the legality of the writ frequently surpassed the merits of the case in legal decisions. The inadequacy of the common law remedy of damages was another yield with the system. Also, the common law only recognized certain kinds of cases for example, the common law courts did not recognize the believe deed.4 The defects in common law obviously led to distress, as disappointed litigants directly petitioned the King for justice. The King, considered the Fountain of Justice, each determined the petitions himself or referred the cases to the Kings Chancellor, usually a clergyman and priest, known as Keeper of Kings conscience. The petitions were decided on the basis of principle of natural justice and moral rightness, considering the merits of the case rather than any precedent.5 The broad principles apply by the K ing and his Chancellors became to be known as rules of equity. Equity was not a complete system of law and as Jacqueline Martin observes, it merely filled the gaps in the common law and softened the strict rules of the common law. 6As the volume of cases increased separate courts called Court of Chancery, also called Courts of Equity, were established and administered by the Chancellor. The Chancellors certain new and flexible procedures, as well as new and appropriate remedies to compensate the plaintiffs, which are relevant to this day. However, the jurisdictional everywherelap of the two systems - common law and equity - led to an inevitable conflict amidst the two, impinging the certainty of law. The conflict was finally resolved by the King in Earl of Oxfords Case (1615) it was command that equity should prevail in case of conflict.7 While the equity courts continued to enjoy supremacy over common law courts, with the enactment of Judicature Acts 1873-75, the common law co urts and the court of equity merged unneurotic to form the Supreme Court of Judicature, which would concurrently administer common and equity. The supremacy of equity in legal decisions was affirmed in Section 25 of the Judicature Act 1873 and continues to be followed by the Supreme Court.