Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History and development of common law and equity
The relation between equity and common law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History and development of common law and equity
Common Law and Equity Inconsistent to draw up the relationship between common law and
equity, we firstly have to define what is common law? What are the
defects of common law, and to what extend equity have been created.
From the development of common law and equity, what has been the
effects of the Judicature Acts 1873-1875? What are the equitable
maxims that are needed to be satisfied? What are the various kind of
equitable remedies that have been developed?
During the Norman Conquest, circuit judges have been travelling from
one county court to another in order to settle disputes. Later, common
law courts have been developed which apply common laws. In common law
courts, if a plaintiff were to bring an action to court, it need to be
started by a writ which sets out the ground claims made or it sets out
the cause of action. New writs were often created to suit new
circumstances. But soon, the creation of new writs have been halted by
parliament the supreme body, when the Provision of Oxford 1258 was
passed. It is because the creation of new writs eroded the parliament
power from enacting laws. Hence, the litigants need to suit their
circumstances based on the existing available writs. They need to suit
their case squarely into the writ, or else there will be no way of
bringing an action to court. Sometimes the price of the writ are more
expensive than the plaintiff claims. There are only one remedy which
is recognised by common law, that is damages. The remedy, damages will
not always be suitable for all cases. Common law does not recognise
trusts and mortg...
... middle of paper ...
...of one parties. If and when that
party declares his intention not to be bound by the contract, he is
said to rescind it. It places both parties to the position in which
they stood before the contract was entered into. Specific performance,
is an order to a person to fulfil his obligations under a contract.
For example, when contracts have been exchanged for the sale of a
house, the court may order a reluctant seller to complete the sale.
Hence, the development of changes from common law to equity has
benefited the whole society largely as they will be able to seek
better redress. It also ensures flexibility in the law as equitable
remedies are discretionary. This subject to, thou a plaintiff maybe
awarded the common law remedy, but the court have the discretion to
chose whether is it just to award equitable remedies.
In colonial America, the court structure was quite different from that of their mother country, Great Britain. The system was a triangle of overlapping courts and common law. Common law was largely influenced by the moral code from the King James Version of the Bible, also known as moral law. In effect, these early American societies were theocratic and autocratic containing religious leaders, as well as magistrates. Sometimes these men were even one and the same. The criminal acts in colonial America were actually very similar to the crime prevalent in our society today. However, certain infractions were taken more seriously. Through the documents provided, we get a look at different crimes and their subsequent punishments in colonial
a. but most admiralty cases can be brought in state courts unless qualify under diversity.
Tort, one of the crucial subjects of study when analyzing common law jurisdictions. Tort, is an action which causes another person or party to suffer harm or loss []. The person who has committed a tortious act is called the tortfeasor while the person who suffered harm or loss from such act is called the injured party or the victim. Although crimes may be torts, torts may not be crimes [] simply because a tort may not have broken a law. In fact, one must understand that the key idea of tort is not to punish the tortfeasor(s) but rather to compensate the victim(s).
court but has not taken the next step to complete transformation by taking action. The
This is where the individuals exercise their rights to seek compensations for damages or injuries. Also this is a law that is not controlled by the judges based on previous things that had happen in the past.
Commonsense justice and jury instructions are placed together to exemplify the informative and the response between the two; like the “analytic and beneficial”. Conjoining these two objectives, gives them “instructive potential for the law;” with the verdicts of not guilty, or hung juries, and jury nullification. These two objectives are “more likely the failure of jury instructions,” [slightly] than the “failings of jurors.”” (Norman J. Finkel, 2000).
In the United States, true equality has never existed. From the Declaration of Independence to modern times, the U.S. legal system has failed in any attempt at equality. The ideology of "all [men] are equal but some [men] are more equal than others" has been present throughout the history of the U.S. (Orwell). Inequality has always existed in the United States legal system and continues to exist today; however, the inequality presently in the system is not as blatant as what it once was, but the system has come to depend on inequality. Since the very beginning of a legal system in the United States, there has been inequality.
Throughout the years there have been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented, they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply, among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved.
all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or may they act by representatives, freely and
When he denounced the colonists for rebelling, King George III was wrong because the established common-law rights were violated by his rule and the colonists’ claims about the violation of these rights were justified. These common law rights (“rights of the Englishmen”) were tampered with by King George III causing the rebellion of so many colonists. This then lead to the statement in King George III’s speech about being the freest member in the nation of Great Britain. This statement made by King George III himself proved the type of rule established in the representative government, a tyranny. The violation of these common- law rights and the false claims promised on these laws just shows how King George III is wrong in the statement delivered to Parliament.
It is for the judge to decide if the case meets two criteria: there must have been a wrongful act committed and the plaintiff must have suffered.
and remedies applied by courts of law in civil proceedings giving the plaintiff or claimant relief
on equity theory, outline the reasons why some employees might feel that the seniority policy might be considered unfair and why other employees might be interested in maintaining this policy. How would you advise Mr. Klein to adjust his seniority policy to maintain equity?
The Development of Common Law and Equity 1.0 Introduction I have been asked to write a report on the development of common law and equity. Common law refers to the law created by judges that was historically significant but has been since superseded by parliament. It is in parallel with equity which refers to the source of law created by the Lord Chancellor which was designed to supplement the common law and allow people the opportunity to avoid the inherent problems. Equity is ‘the gloss on the common law’. The following report will go through step by step on how common law and equity have developed between the years 1066 to our present day.