- Key People:
- James Kent
- Sir George Jessel
- Joseph Story
- Related Topics:
- Common law
Equity
-
What is equity in law?
In Anglo-American law, equity refers to a system of law that developed outside of common law or codified law. It emerged because the traditional common-law courts offered limited remedies, primarily monetary damages or property recovery, which were often insufficient for new and complex situations.
Litigants began petitioning the king for justice, leading to the development of the Court of Chancery. This court fashioned new equitable remedies, such as specific performance of contracts, enforcement of trusts, injunctions to prevent harm, and restitution for unjust enrichment. Equity ensures fairness and impartiality, aiming to provide justice when legal remedies are inadequate or nonexistent. Modern legal systems have largely merged law and equity, allowing a single court to administer both.
Created from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How is equity different from regular law (also known as common law)?
Equity in Anglo-American law refers to a body of customs and remedies developed by courts outside of common law or statutory law. While common law courts primarily offered damages or property recovery, equity courts provided relief when these remedies were insufficient or unjust.
Key differences include:
* Remedies: Equity introduced remedies like specific performance of contracts, enforcement of trusts, and injunctions, which were not available at common law.
* Flexibility: Equity aimed to provide justice based on fairness and the specific circumstances of a case, whereas common law was often more rigid.Over time, the distinction between law and equity has been merged in many jurisdictions, allowing a single court to administer both.
1 Britannica SourceCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Why was equity developed in courts?
Equity in Anglo-American law developed to provide remedies when common law or statutory law was insufficient or inequitable. By the late 13th century, English common-law courts primarily offered damages or property recovery, failing to address new, complex situations fairly. Litigants seeking justice turned to the king, whose petitions were handled by the lord chancellor. This led to the establishment of the Court of Chancery, which fashioned new equitable remedies like specific performance for contracts and injunctions to prevent wrongs. Equity aimed to achieve justice by considering the fairness of individual cases, supplementing the rigid nature of common-law remedies.
5 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What are some common remedies provided by equity?
Equity, in Anglo-American law, provides remedies when common law or statutory law may be insufficient or inequitable. Common remedies include:
- Injunctions: Court orders to do or not do a specific act, aimed at preventing irreparable harm.
- Specific Performance: Compelling a party to fulfill a contract, particularly when damages would be an inadequate remedy, such as in real estate transactions.
- Rescission: The act of canceling or annulling a contract.
- Rectification: Correcting a written instrument due to mistake or misrepresentation.
- Restitution: Requiring the surrender of wrongfully acquired benefits to prevent unjust enrichment.
4 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How do judges decide when to apply equity instead of common law?
Judges apply equity when common law remedies are insufficient or unavailable. Historically, common law courts primarily offered monetary damages or property recovery. When these were inadequate, such as in contracts for unique items or to prevent irreparable harm, litigants petitioned the king's chancellor, leading to the development of distinct courts of equity.
Equity provides remedies like specific performance of contracts, enforcement of trusts, and injunctions to prevent wrongs. While early equity emphasized discretion, it evolved into a recognized body of law. In modern systems, law and equity are often administered by the same courts, but the principle remains: equity intervenes when the law alone cannot achieve a just outcome.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How does equity help make the legal system fairer for people?
Equity enhances the fairness of the legal system by providing remedies when statutory or common law might be insufficient or inequitable. Historically, common law courts primarily offered monetary damages or property recovery. When these remedies were inadequate, individuals petitioned the king, leading to the development of the Court of Chancery. This court introduced new equitable remedies such as specific performance for contracts, enforcement of trusts, injunctions to prevent harm, and restitution for wrongfully acquired benefits. These remedies offered a more flexible and just approach compared to the rigid nature of common law. Modern legal systems have largely merged law and equity, allowing courts to administer both types of remedies, thereby ensuring a fairer outcome for individuals by considering the unique circumstances of each case.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
Equity, in Anglo-American law, the custom of courts outside the common law or coded law. Equity provided remedies in situations in which precedent or statutory law might not apply or be equitable.
By the end of the 13th century, the English kingās common-law courts had largely limited the relief available in civil cases to the payment of damages and to the recovery of the possession of property. They had refused to extend and diversify their types of relief to meet the needs of new and more complex situations. Disappointed litigants had turned to the king with petitions for justice because the courts had afforded either no remedy or one that was ineffective. These petitions were referred to the lord chancellor, who was the kingās principal minister. By the early years of the 14th century the petitions were going directly to the chancellor, and by the middle of that century the Court of Chancery was recognized as a new and distinct court.
These developments resulted in the fashioning by the chancellor of new equitable remedies. The following are representative: specific performance of contract, whereby the victim of a breach might compel the exact performance promised if damages would be a poor substitute, as in contracts to sell land and unique chattels; the enforcement of trusts, where one who had been given title to property in order to manage it for another was required to fulfill his fiduciary obligations; injunction to prevent threatened or continuing wrong, such as destruction of the plaintiffās invaluable shade trees; restitution of benefits wrongfully acquired, by compulsory surrender of the ill-gotten gains, in order to prevent unjust enrichment; the correction and cancellation of written instruments for mistake and misrepresentation; and the equity of redemption, which enabled a defaulting mortgagor to reclaim his land if he tendered principal and interest within a reasonable time after forfeiture and before foreclosure. Such new equitable remedies contrasted with the narrow rigidity of common-law remedies.
" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">
The full growth of equitable remedies was retarded, however, by political pressures from judges and Parliament not to trespass upon the province of the separate law courts. As a result, the chancellor was forced to agree not to hear a case unless there was no remedy at law (e.g., trust) or the remedy at law was inadequate or the threatened injury would be irreparable.
Another restrictive influence was the development of precedent in the Chancery. For generations the chancellors had not considered themselves bound by precedents or rules of law; emphasis had been put mainly upon the discretionary treatment of needs of the individual case. From the mid-16th century on, however, the chancellors were usually common lawyers who began shaping equity into an established set of rules. By the middle of the 17th century the equity administered by the Court of Chancery had become a recognized part of the law of the land: equity gave justice according to law rather than executive justice. Finally, by the Judicature Act of 1873, the competitive, separate law and equity courts, with their attendant delays, expense, and injustices, were abolished and their work combined in a single, departmentalized Supreme Court of Judicature.
Courts of equity also developed early in the United States; but in the late 19th and early 20th centuries most U.S. states similarly abolished the distinctions between actions at law and suits in equity and fused their administration in one procedural system, with only one civil action, in the same court.
Modern equity has been much assisted by legislation. The old notion that equity protects only property rights has been virtually abandoned. Now an employee, for example, can be barred from competing with his employer after discharge or resignation. Statutes have facilitated specific performance of cooperative-marketing contracts and agreements to arbitrate future commercial or labour disputes. An injunction may now be obtainedāwhere other factors of appropriateness permitāagainst threatened injury to interests of personality, such as civil liberties, privacy, reputation, and domestic relations. Enabling legislation has immensely increased the resort to injunction by government agencies to prevent violation of regulatory statutes, notwithstanding criminal penalties.
The trusted destination for professionals, college students, and lifelong learners.
SUBSCRIBE
