31:
947:
Often, this form of relief is in practical terms more valuable to a litigant; for example, a plaintiff whose neighbor will not return his only milk cow, which had wandered onto the neighbor's property, may want that particular cow back, not just its monetary value. However, in general, a litigant cannot obtain equitable relief unless there is "no adequate remedy at law"; that is, a court will not grant an injunction unless monetary damages are an insufficient remedy for the injury in question. Law courts can also enter certain types of immediately enforceable orders, called "
4220:
1155:
387:". During the 15th century, Chancery pleadings began to expressly invoke "conscience", to the point that English lawyers in the late 15th century thought of Chancery as a court of "conscience", not a court of "equity". However, the "reasoning of the medieval chancellors has not been preserved" as to what they actually meant by the word "conscience", and modern scholars can only indirectly guess at what the word probably meant. The publication of the treatise
4234:
999:: "If the legislature means to enact an injustice, however palpable, the court of Chancery is not the body with whom a correcting power is lodged. That it shall not interpose in any case which does not come within a general description and admit of redress by a general and practicable rule." The US Supreme Court, however, has concluded that courts have wide discretion to fashion relief in cases of equity. The first major statement of this power came in
977:, cases that traditionally would have been handled by the law courts. The question of whether a case should be determined by a jury depends largely on the type of relief the plaintiff requests. If a plaintiff requests damages in the form of money or certain other forms of relief, such as the return of a specific item of property, the remedy is considered legal, and a jury is available as the fact-finder. On the other hand, if the plaintiff requests an
581:
239:
organized into a
Chancery Division and a Law Division. There is a difference of opinion in Commonwealth countries as to whether equity and common law have been fused or are merely administered by the same court, with the orthodox view that they have not (expressed as rejecting the "fusion fallacy") prevailing in Australia, while support for fusion has been expressed by the
915:
longer discretionary upon the courts or as the
English law has it, "Chancellor's foot" but instead are enforceable rights subject to the conditions under the 1963 Act being satisfied. Nonetheless, in the event of situations not covered under the 1963 Act, the courts in India continue to exercise their inherent powers in terms of Section 151 of the
523:'s response to Selden in an 1818 chancery case: "I cannot agree that the doctrines of this court are to be changed with every succeeding judge. Nothing would inflict on me greater pain, in quitting this place, than the recollection that I had done anything to justify the reproach that the equity of this court varies like the Chancellor's foot."
1017:
successful handling of certain law cases is difficult or impossible unless a temporary restraining order (TRO) or preliminary injunction is issued at the outset, to restrain someone from fleeing the jurisdiction taking the only property available to satisfy a judgment, for instance. Furthermore, certain statutes like the
554:
In order to avoid paying land taxes and other feudal dues, lawyers developed a primitive form of trust called 'the use' that enabled one person (who was not required to pay tax) to hold the legal title of the land for the use of another person. The effect of this trust was that the first person owned
418:
The early chancellors were influenced by their training in theology and canon law, but the law of equity they applied was not canon law, but a new kind of law purportedly driven by conscience. Whatever it meant in the medieval era, the word "conscience" clearly carried a subjective connotation (as it
338:
Because the writ system was limited to enumerated writs for enumerated rights and wrongs, it sometimes produced unjust results. Thus, even though the King's Bench might have jurisdiction over a case and might have the power to issue the perfect writ, the plaintiff might still not have a case if there
661:
is particularly well known for the strength of its Equity jurisprudence. However, it was only in 1972 with the introduction of reform to the
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) that empowered both the Equity and Common Law Division of the Supreme Court of NSW to grant relief in either equity or common law.
510:
Equity is a roguish thing: for law we have a measure, know what to trust to; equity is according to the conscience of him that is
Chancellor, and as that is larger or narrower, so is equity. 'Tis all one as if they should make the standard for the measure we call a foot, a Chancellor's foot; what an
351:
argued that the delegation was initially driven by practical concerns and the moral justification came later. The moral justification went as follows: as Keeper of the King's
Conscience, the Chancellor "would act in particular cases to admit 'merciful exceptions' to the King's general laws to ensure
515:
After 1660, Chancery cases were regularly reported, several equitable doctrines developed, and equity started to evolve into a system of precedents like its common law cousin. Over time, equity jurisprudence would gradually become a "body of equitable law, as complex, doctrinal, and rule-haunted as
414:
A common criticism of
Chancery practice as it developed in the early medieval period was that it lacked fixed rules, varied greatly from Chancellor to Chancellor, and the Chancellor was exercising an unbounded discretion. The counterargument was that equity mitigated the rigour of the common law by
946:
In modern practice, perhaps the most important distinction between law and equity is the set of remedies each offers. The most common civil remedy a court of law can award is monetary damages. Equity, however, enters injunctions or decrees directing someone either to act or to forbear from acting.
434:
into
Chancery. This was a "wild exaggeration", but as a result, the Crown began to transition away from clergy and nonlawyers and instead appointed only lawyers trained in the common law tradition to the position of Lord Chancellor (although there were six more nonlawyer chancellors in the decades
914:
With this codification, the nature and tenure of the equitable reliefs available earlier have been modified to make them statutory rights and are also required to be pleaded specifically to be enforced. Further to the extent that these equitable reliefs have been codified into rights, they are no
1016:
In the United States, the federal courts and most state courts have merged law and equity into courts of general jurisdiction, such as county courts. However, the substantive distinction between law and equity has retained its old vitality. This difference is not a mere technicality, because the
342:
Litigants began to seek relief against unfair judgments of the common law courts by petitioning the King. Such petitions were initially processed by the King's
Council, which itself was quite overworked, and the Council began to delegate the hearing of such petitions to the Lord Chancellor. This
375:
influenced the development of the distinctly different but related
English concept of equity: "The equity administered by the early English chancellors ... confessedly borrowed from the aequitas and the judicial powers of the Roman magistrates." By the 15th century the judicial power of
145:
Jurisdictions which have inherited the common law system differ in their treatment of equity. Over the course of the twentieth century some common law systems began to place less emphasis on the historical or institutional origin of substantive legal rules. In
England and Wales, Australia, New
141:
of the 1870s effected a procedural fusion of the two bodies of law, ending their institutional separation. The reforms did not fuse the actual bodies of law however. As an example, this lack of fusion meant it was still not possible to receive an equitable remedy for a purely common law wrong.
238:
of property. This split propagated to many of the colonies, including the United States. The states of Delaware, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee continue to have divided Courts of Law and Courts of Chancery. In New Jersey, the appellate courts are unified, but the trial courts are
360:
By the 14th century it appears that Chancery was operating as a court, affording remedies for which the strict procedures of the common law worked injustice or provided no remedy to a deserving plaintiff. Chancellors often had theological and clerical training and were well versed in
487:(1615) where a judgment of Chief Justice Coke was allegedly obtained by fraud. Chancellor Ellesmere issued an injunction from the Chancery prohibiting the enforcement of the common law order. The two courts became locked in a stalemate, and the matter was eventually referred to the
356:
was right before God". This concern for the King's conscience was then extended to the conscience of the defendant in Chancery, in that the Chancellor would intervene to prevent "unconscionable" conduct on the part of the defendant, in order to protect the conscience of the King.
880:
and repealing the earlier "Specific Relief Act" of 1877. Under the 1963 Act, most equitable concepts were codified and made statutory rights, thereby ending the discretionary role of the courts to grant equitable reliefs. The rights codified under the 1963 Act were as under:
1005:, 75 U.S. 557 (1869). The Court concluded that "relief is not a matter of absolute right to either party; it is a matter resting in the discretion of the court, to be exercised upon a consideration of all the circumstances of each particular case."
526:
Equity's primacy over common law in England was later enshrined in the Judicature Acts of the 1870s, which also served to fuse the courts of equity and the common law (although emphatically not the systems themselves) into one unified court system.
292:, and whose jurisdiction over disputes between the King's subjects was based upon the King's writ. Initially, a writ was probably a vague order to do right by the plaintiff, and it was usually a writ of grace, issued at the pleasure of the King.
1462:
There is currently a divergence of opinion between the High Court of Australia and the Supreme Court of England on this point. In Australia, the continuing existence of the equitable jurisdiction to relieve against penalties has been confirmed:
1119:
After US courts merged law and equity, American law courts adopted many of the procedures of equity courts. The procedures in a court of equity were much more flexible than the courts at common law. In American practice, certain devices such as
410:
rather than the letter" of the law. What was new was the application of the word "equity" to "the extraordinary form of justice administered by the chancellor", as a convenient way to distinguish Chancery jurisprudence from the common law.
249:
The latter part of the twentieth century saw increased debate over the utility of treating equity as a separate body of law. These debates were labelled the "fusion wars". A particular flashpoint in this debate centred on the concept of
662:
In 1972 NSW also adopted one of the essential sections of the Judicature reforms, which emphasised that where there was a conflict between the common law and equity, equity would always prevail. Nevertheless, in 1975 three alumni of
50:, with the general purpose of providing legal remedies for cases wherein the common law is inflexible and cannot fairly resolve the disputed legal matter. Conceptually, equity was part of the historical origins of the system of
566:
The response of the lawyers to this Statute was to create the 'use upon a use'. The Statute recognized only the first use, and so land owners were again able to separate the legal and beneficial interests in their land.
562:
in 1535 (which became effective in 1536) in an attempt to outlaw this practice and recover lost revenue. The Act effectively made the beneficial owner of the land the legal owner and therefore liable for feudal dues.
1028:
Equity courts were widely distrusted in the northeastern United States following the American Revolution. A serious movement for merger of law and equity began in the states in the mid-19th century, when
2063:
As the title implies, this source is a 314-page treatment of the history of the concept of conscience in the Court of Chancery, to the extent that such history can be inferred from surviving sources.
327:(as a matter of right). Each of these writs was associated with particular circumstances and led to a particular kind of judgment. Procedure in the common law courts became tightly focused on the
1025:
equitable relief, which forces American courts to analyze in lengthy detail whether the relief demanded in particular cases brought under those statutes would have been available in equity.
454:
The development of a court of equity as a remedy for the rigid procedure of the common law courts meant it was inevitable that the two systems would come into conflict. Litigants would go '
2855:
462:
prohibiting the enforcement of a common law court order. The penalty for disobeying an equitable injunction and enforcing an unconscionable common law judgment was imprisonment.
295:
During the 12th and 13th centuries, writ procedure gradually evolved into something much more rigid. All writs to commence actions had to be purchased by litigants from the
2878:
511:
uncertain measure would this be? One Chancellor has a long foot, another a short foot, a third an indifferent foot: 'tis the same thing in a Chancellor's conscience.
1068:) have separate divisions for legal and equitable matters in a single court. Virginia had separate law and equity dockets (in the same court) until 2006. Besides
646:
re-affirm the continuing vitality of traditional equitable doctrines. In 2009 the High Court affirmed the importance of equity and dismissed the suggestion that
2534:
729:
argue that in many cases the inclusion of the label "legal" or "equitable" before a substantive rule is often unnecessary. Many English universities, such as
419:
still does today). Complaints about equity as an arbitrary exercise of conscience by nonlawyer Chancellors became quite frequent under the chancellorship of
2561:
971:
331:(the particular procedure authorized by a particular writ to enforce a particular substantive right), rather than what modern lawyers would now call the
1563: at – (Spigelman CJ), – (Mason P, dissenting), (Heydon JA), (2003) 56 NSWLR 298, 306 (Spigelman CJ), 325–9 (Mason P, dissenting), 391–2 (Heydon JA)
1116:
in 1978, bankruptcy courts are still officially considered "courts of equity" and exercise equitable powers under Section 105 of the Bankruptcy Code.
499:, upheld the use of the equitable injunction and concluded that in the event of any conflict between the common law and equity, equity would prevail.
938:
which confers wide powers on the Supreme Court to pass orders "as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause of matter pending before it".
2709:
2624:
436:
91:). Later, in civil law systems, equity was integrated in the legal rules, while in common law systems it became an independent body of law.
54:
of England, yet is a field of law separate from common law, because equity has its own unique rules and principles, and was administered by
680:. It remains one of the most highly regarded practitioner texts in Australia and England. The work is now in its 5th edition and edited by
1349:'Common law' here is used in its narrow sense, referring to that body of law principally developed in the superior courts of common law:
846:, but can deal with situations where the law is silent, or where there is an omission in statute. Such an omission is sometimes termed a
427:
3014:
2779:
Funk, Kellen (2015). "Equity without Chancery: The Fusion of Law and Equity in the Field Code of Civil Procedure, New York 1846–76".
4201:
753:
339:
was not a single form of action combining them. Lacking a legal remedy, the plaintiff's only option would be to petition the King.
19:
This article is about the area of law. For remedies offered by this area of law, such as injunctions and specific performance, see
4284:
3004:
1018:
30:
465:
The 1615 conflict between common law and equity came about because of a "clash of strong personalities" between Lord Chancellor
254:
and whether areas of law traditionally regarded as equitable could be rationalised as part of a single body of law known as the
488:
2827:
393:
in the early 16th century marked the beginning of Chancery's transformation from a court of conscience to a court of equity.
3029:
2718: (2006). (Roberts CJ for a unanimous court) (reviewing the scope of equitable relief as authorized by the ERISA statute).
2691:
1892:
1610:
466:
121:
For much of its history, the English common law was principally developed and administered in the central royal courts: the
1315:
A Law Dictionary, containing definitions of the terms and phrases of American and English jurisprudence, ancient and modern
443:
was appointed as Lord Chancellor in 2016, but this was after the position had been stripped of its judicial powers by the
2985:
2918:
2518:
1350:
470:
344:
277:
159:
122:
3627:
3185:
3084:
2322:
2260:
2210:
2166:
2124:
2084:
2049:
2015:
1981:
1926:
1853:
1750:
1725:
1700:
1635:
1527:
1447:
1422:
1385:
1291:
839:
624:
483:
that required the release of people imprisoned for contempt of chancery orders. This tension reached a climax in the
606:
3741:
3610:
1038:
764:
2 AC 694, 700), where the notion that the court's jurisdiction to grant relief was "unlimited and unfettered" (per
435:
after Wriothesley). The last person without training in the common law before 2016 to serve as Lord Chancellor was
868:
doctrine of equity had traditionally been followed even after it became independent in 1947. However, in 1963 the
311:
that the Chancellor could no longer create new writs without permission from the King and the King's Council (the
4196:
3543:
3444:
1839:
1354:
1109:
1105:
930:
in terms of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Further, such inherent powers are vested in the
916:
689:
281:
155:
126:
3703:
3337:
2961:
2937:
2763:
2290:
1951:
1574:
676:
591:
444:
502:
Chancery continued to be the subject of extensive criticism, the most famous of which was 17th-century jurist
3056:
1113:
718:
520:
255:
151:
114:. In common law jurisdictions, the word "equity" "is not a synonym for 'general fairness' or 'natural justice
3863:
3342:
2308:
2196:
2152:
2110:
448:
267:
2450:
1538:
and equitable courts, procedure, rights, and remedies, etc., are frequently contrasted, and in this sense
555:
the land under the common law, but the second person had a right to use the land under the law of equity.
3858:
2435:
989:, modification of contract, or some other non-monetary relief, the claim would usually be one in equity.
240:
1037:
of 1848. The federal courts did not abandon the old law/equity separation until the promulgation of the
379:
Early Chancery pleadings vaguely invoked some sort of higher justice, such as with the formula "for the
146:
Zealand, and Canada, equity remains a distinct body of law. Modern equity includes, among other things:
3833:
3332:
1188:
1145:
1049:
384:
296:
185:
3916:
142:
Judicial or academic reasoning which assumes the contrary has been described as a "fusion fallacy".
3711:
3693:
2234:
869:
540:
484:
431:
397:
396:
Before that point in time, the word "equity" was used in the common law to refer to a principle of
276:
of England in the 11th century, royal justice came to be administered in three central courts: the
178:
62:
4045:
2585:
4086:
3873:
3362:
3347:
2879:"Another Conflict in the Circuits Brewing Over Bankruptcy Court's Equitable Powers Under §105(a)"
1515:
877:
765:
734:
693:
643:
602:
193:
24:
1519:
1064:. However, merger in some states is less than complete; some other states (such as Illinois and
4141:
4126:
2535:"Nobile officium used to recognise English High Court orders due to statutory casus improvisus"
2511:
The Nobile Officium: The Extraordinary Equitable Jurisdiction of the Supreme Courts of Scotland
931:
920:
793:
642:
Equity remains a cornerstone of Australian private law. A string of cases in the 1980s saw the
389:
234:
to a party to do something, give something to someone, or stop doing something) and recognized
2808:
2755:
2748:
2312:
2200:
2156:
2114:
1843:
1798:
1375:
4274:
4245:
3838:
3516:
3327:
2481:
2074:
2039:
2005:
1971:
1882:
1600:
1560:
1057:
1030:
935:
801:
455:
304:
288:. The common law developed in these royal courts, which were created by the authority of the
118:", but refers to "a particular body of rules that originated in a special system of courts".
2250:
1916:
1778:
1313:
3966:
3312:
2465:
2419:
2403:
1468:
1230:
1053:
986:
982:
927:
730:
308:
842:
or the common law already specify the relevant remedy. Thus, the Court cannot set aside a
303:. After writs began to become more specific and creative (in terms of the relief sought),
8:
4279:
4121:
3261:
3178:
1371:
1367:
1061:
873:
3936:
3595:
3449:
3434:
3412:
3156:
3136:
3089:
3079:
2822:
2796:
2664:
2366:
1818:
1673:
1508:
1193:
781:
737:, continue to teach Equity as a standalone subject. Leading practitioner texts include
548:
496:
407:
285:
246:
For most purposes, the U.S. federal system and most states have merged the two courts.
223:
130:
3019:
3001:
598:
3921:
3843:
3681:
3424:
3419:
3372:
3297:
3291:
3131:
3049:
3025:
2981:
2957:
2933:
2914:
2804:
2800:
2759:
2687:
2600:
2514:
2318:
2286:
2256:
2206:
2162:
2120:
2080:
2045:
2011:
1977:
1947:
1922:
1888:
1849:
1746:
1721:
1696:
1631:
1606:
1523:
1443:
1418:
1381:
1287:
1255:
1215:
1183:
1001:
714:
663:
647:
343:
delegation is often justified by the fact that the Lord Chancellor was literally the
315:). Pursuant to this authorization, litigants could purchase certain enumerated writs
251:
215:
134:
107:
70:
47:
35:
1476:
1056:(which includes a disproportionate number of multi-state corporations) are decided;
535:
One area in which the Court of Chancery assumed a vital role was the enforcement of
3926:
3893:
3392:
3256:
3251:
3216:
2831:
2788:
2656:
2494:
2358:
1810:
1665:
1220:
1209:
1203:
992:
926:
There is no such inherent powers with the criminal courts in India except with the
789:
423:(1515–1529), who "had no legal training, and delighted in putting down lawyers".
348:
219:
55:
20:
2971:
For a brief outline of the maxims, doctrines and remedies developed under equity:
2792:
1848:(2001 reprint of 5th ed.). Boston: Little, Brown & Company. p. 180.
4175:
4148:
4136:
4116:
4050:
4028:
4008:
4003:
3983:
3848:
3828:
3823:
3726:
3686:
3397:
3322:
3246:
3231:
3151:
3008:
2385:
1494:
4. The body of law derived from law courts as opposed to those sitting in equity.
1250:
1198:
1168:
996:
843:
807:
658:
559:
332:
300:
289:
273:
138:
1946:. Clarendon Law Series (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. pp. 10–11.
962:
Another distinction is the unavailability of a jury in equity: the judge is the
4252:
4060:
3978:
3567:
3533:
3484:
3469:
3241:
3146:
3126:
3116:
1656:
Burrows, Andrew (1 March 2002), "We Do This At Common Law But That in Equity",
1225:
726:
671:
328:
103:
4268:
4106:
4065:
3951:
3931:
3903:
3853:
3818:
3792:
3787:
3780:
3731:
3671:
3511:
3501:
3459:
3382:
3377:
3307:
3266:
3190:
2686:. New Horizons in Law and Economics. Cheltenham, England: Elgar. p. 20.
1240:
1069:
963:
952:
830:
are silent, and prevent mistakes in procedure or practice that would lead to
717:. The main challenge to it has come from academic writers working within the
667:
650:
has explanatory power in relation to traditional equitable doctrines such as
492:
479:
420:
200:
543:
could not accommodate. This role gave rise to the basic distinction between
218:
had two complementary court systems: courts of "law" which could only award
210:, 10th ed., definition 4, differentiates "common law" (or just "law") from "
4238:
3988:
3956:
3911:
3649:
3644:
3615:
3528:
3506:
3474:
3407:
3387:
3281:
3221:
3211:
3163:
3099:
3042:
1780:
An Historical Sketch of the Equitable Jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery
1133:
1125:
1089:
819:
685:
681:
2647:"Events Subsequent to the Contract As a Defence to Specific Performance".
1669:
1534:
Second, with the development of equity and equitable rights and remedies,
995:
explained in 1785 that there are three main limitations on the power of a
570:
4160:
4101:
4091:
3888:
3883:
3721:
3622:
3538:
3497:
3464:
3429:
3352:
3276:
3226:
3141:
1235:
1129:
722:
710:
651:
536:
503:
474:
380:
312:
235:
231:
222:
and recognized only the legal owner of property, and courts of "equity" (
189:
100:
2904:
For a history of equity in England, including the Statute of Uses 1535:
2821:
Sources that mention four states (e.g., Laycock 2002) generally include
4224:
4153:
4033:
3971:
3716:
3637:
3632:
3590:
3572:
3560:
3521:
3367:
3357:
3317:
3302:
3286:
3236:
3173:
3168:
2668:
2370:
2347:"'Cardozo's Foot': The Chancellor's Conscience and Constructive Trusts"
2346:
1822:
1677:
1178:
1159:
1101:
1077:
1065:
1034:
978:
967:
956:
907:
865:
827:
785:
544:
459:
353:
227:
111:
66:
51:
2825:, which abolished its separate chancery courts as of January 1, 2002.
16:
Set of legal principles supplementing but distinct from the Common Law
4131:
4096:
4038:
4013:
3878:
3775:
3763:
3748:
3736:
3664:
3582:
3555:
3439:
1245:
1073:
835:
831:
440:
366:
362:
165:
133:. Equity was the name given to the law which was administered in the
82:
74:
4219:
2660:
2362:
2076:
Conscience, Equity and the Court of Chancery in Early Modern England
2041:
Conscience, Equity and the Court of Chancery in Early Modern England
2007:
Conscience, Equity and the Court of Chancery in Early Modern England
1973:
Conscience, Equity and the Court of Chancery in Early Modern England
1814:
1154:
609:. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.
519:
One indicator of equity's evolution into a coherent body of law was
4180:
4165:
3868:
3753:
3550:
3094:
2947:
For a general treatise on Equity, including a historical analysis:
1173:
1093:
1085:
1045:
1010:
889:
797:
752:
Limits on the power of equity in English law were clarified by the
171:
87:
73:. The tradition of equity begins in antiquity with the writings of
2239:, I Ch Rep I, 21 ER 485 (Court of Chancery 1615).
762:
Scandinavian Trading Tanker Co. A.B. v Flota Petrolera Ecuatoriana
4070:
4018:
3998:
3946:
3758:
3676:
3492:
3454:
3402:
3024:
Hudson, Alastair, 5th edition, Routledge-Cavendish, London, 2007
1121:
1097:
1081:
823:
2956:. Clarendon Law Series (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
1695:. Clarendon Law Series (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
1417:. Trusts, Wills and Probate Library (5th ed.). LexisNexis.
261:
4170:
4023:
3768:
3659:
3654:
3600:
3271:
1104:
was also historically considered an equitable matter; although
955:), but they are less flexible and less easily obtained than an
106:, equity is the body of law which was developed in the English
94:
2625:"Judicial Revision of Frustrated Contracts: The United States"
2317:(5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 119.
2205:(5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 117.
2161:(5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 115.
2119:(5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 114.
1654:
For an example of the pro-fusionist view, see Andrew Burrows,
1380:(4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 105.
451:
as the highest judge sitting in equity in England and Wales.)
4111:
4055:
3961:
3802:
3605:
3104:
2496:
Union Eagle Limited v. Golden Achievement Limited (Hong Kong)
861:
2462:
Cukurova Finance International Ltd v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd
2255:(9th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 6.
1921:(9th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 5.
1884:
The Principles of Roman Law and Their Relation to Modern Law
1415:
Meagher, Gummow & Lehane's Equity: Doctrine and Remedies
1307:
1305:
1303:
1044:
Three states still have separate courts for law and equity:
477:. Chief Justice Coke began the practice of issuing writs of
3993:
3941:
3797:
3195:
3111:
2852:
Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia, Rule 3:1. See also
1887:(2002 reprint ed.). The Lawbook Exchange. p. 79.
1108:
is today a purely federal matter, reserved entirely to the
1033:
convinced New York State to adopt what became known as the
970:
in civil cases tried in federal court is guaranteed by the
948:
885:
Recovery of possession of immovable property (ss. 5–8)
2978:
Todd & Watt's Cases and Materials on Equity and Trusts
2856:"The Merger of Common-Law and Equity Pleading in Virginia"
1076:, areas traditionally handled by chancery courts included
321:(as a matter of course) which later became known as writs
3065:
1465:
Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited
1300:
1013:
law regarding intent and enforcement. as well as equity.
2928:
Cockburn, Tina; Harris, Wendy; Shirley, Melinda (2005).
2499:
UKPC 5, delivered 3 February 1997, accessed 13 July 2023
1377:
An Introduction to the Legal System of the United States
834:. The exercise of this power is limited by adherence to
46:
is the particular body of law, developed in the English
1626:
Degeling, Simone; Edelman, James, eds. (October 2005).
571:
Comparison of equity traditions in common law countries
3034:
1471:, 247 CLR 205. In England, this view was not adopted:
406:: the idea that written laws ought to be interpreted "
2927:
2909:
Cockburn, Tina; Shirley, Melinda (14 November 2011).
1834:
1832:
1413:
Heydon, J. D.; Leeming, M. J.; Turner, P. G. (2014).
1318:(second ed.). West Publishing Co. pp. 432–3
1143:
772:
A.C. 691, 726) was rejected as a "beguiling heresy".
784:
have never recognised a division between the normal
110:
and which is now administered concurrently with the
3002:
Christopher St. Germain's Doctor and Student (1518)
2283:
Sources of English Legal and Constitutional History
1783:. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 9.
1412:
747:
Hayton & Underhill's Law of Trusts and Trustees
430:, a nonlawyer, was accused of trying to inject the
335:(the underlying substantive right to be enforced).
2747:
2623:
2562:"A Brief Excursion into the Scottish Legal System"
2560:
1829:
1575:"Fallacy or Furphy?: Fusion in a Judicature World"
1507:
1360:
2729:Great-West Life & Annuity Ins. Co. v. Knudson
2303:
2301:
2191:
2189:
2187:
2185:
2147:
2145:
2143:
2105:
2103:
1965:
1963:
4266:
174:(including promissory and proprietary estoppel);
2908:
2710:Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc.
2527:
1772:
1770:
1768:
1766:
1764:
1762:
1625:
1499:
1473:Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi
1286:. Oxford University Press 2021. pp. 11ff.
2298:
2182:
2140:
2100:
2066:
2031:
1997:
1960:
1910:
1908:
1906:
1904:
1876:
1874:
1872:
1605:(3rd ed.). New York: Simon and Schuster.
437:Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury
3050:
2750:Modern American Remedies: Cases and materials
1482:
966:. In the American legal system, the right of
262:History of equity in common law jurisdictions
2877:Hawes, Lesley Anne (January–February 2013).
1759:
901:Cancellation of instruments (ss. 31–33)
684:, former Justice of the High Court, Justice
95:Equity in common law jurisdictions (general)
2951:
2617:
2615:
2242:
2079:. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing. p. 44.
2044:. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing. p. 17.
2010:. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing. p. 15.
1976:. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing. p. 13.
1941:
1901:
1869:
1592:
1284:The Function of Equity in International Law
847:
813:
805:
401:
370:
322:
316:
3057:
3043:
2684:Inflation and the Enforcement of Contracts
2592:
2285:, Sydney: Butterworths, pp. 223–224,
2281:Evans, Michael; Jack, R Ian, eds. (1984),
1792:
1790:
1650:
1648:
1366:
1340:(Peter Muckley tr, Martinus Nijhoff 2008)
415:looking to substance rather than to form.
3015:Delaware Court of Chancery: Official site
2980:(6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
2583:
2280:
1838:
1745:(3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
1720:(3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
895:Rectification of instruments (s. 26)
625:Learn how and when to remove this message
439:, who served briefly from 1672 to 1673. (
4202:History of the American legal profession
3011:, the classic common law text on equity.
2612:
2314:An Introduction to English Legal History
2202:An Introduction to English Legal History
2158:An Introduction to English Legal History
2116:An Introduction to English Legal History
1743:The Principles of the Law of Restitution
1598:
369:. During this era, the Roman concept of
29:
2745:
2573:(2). University of Birmingham: 155–161.
2508:
2502:
1880:
1796:
1787:
1715:
1655:
1645:
1572:
1019:Employee Retirement Income Security Act
1009:was for many years the leading case in
898:Recession of contracts (ss. 27–30)
530:
61:Equity exists in domestic law, both in
4267:
2952:Worthington, Sarah (12 October 2006).
2853:
2681:
2675:
2621:
2344:
2338:
2072:
2037:
2003:
1969:
1942:Worthington, Sarah (12 October 2006).
1505:
1442:(33rd ed.). Sweet & Maxwell.
1438:McGhee, John, ed. (13 December 2017).
1437:
709:Equity remains a distinct part of the
307:responded in 1258 by providing in the
3038:
2876:
2754:(3rd ed.). Aspen Press. p.
2558:
2307:
2195:
2151:
2109:
1776:
1740:
1690:
1408:
1406:
1404:
1311:
666:and judges of the NSW Supreme Court,
539:, a role that the rigid framework of
2975:
2830:. Arkansas Judiciary. Archived from
2778:
2447:Law Reform (Law and Equity) Act 1972
2345:Powell, H. Jefferson (Summer 1993).
2248:
1914:
1492:(10th ed.). 2014. p. 334.
1281:
1277:
1275:
1273:
1271:
1136:originated in the courts of equity.
904:Declaratory decrees (ss. 34–35)
876:following the recommendation of the
704:
574:
458:' and often would seek an equitable
2932:. Sydney: LexisNexis Butterworths.
2584:Jefferson, Thomas (November 1785).
1845:A Concise History of the Common Law
1716:Burrows, Andrew (2 December 2010).
1514:(2nd, revised ed.). New York:
1490:Black's Law Dictionary – Common law
13:
1510:A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage
1401:
376:Chancery was clearly recognised.
14:
4296:
3186:Restitution and unjust enrichment
2995:
2860:University of Richmond Law Review
1881:Burdick, William Livesey (1938).
1268:
800:) has exercised an equitable and
699:
4233:
4232:
4218:
2622:Dawson, John P. (January 1984).
1840:Plucknett, Theodore Frank Thomas
1777:Kerly, Duncan Mackenzie (1890).
1741:Virgo, Graham (13 August 2015).
1691:Birks, Peter (13 January 2005).
1599:Friedman, Lawrence Meir (2005).
1153:
1039:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
941:
677:Equity: Doctrines & Remedies
579:
4197:History of the legal profession
2870:
2846:
2815:
2772:
2739:
2721:
2700:
2640:
2577:
2552:
2487:
2471:
2455:
2440:
2425:
2409:
2392:
2378:
2269:
2226:
1935:
1734:
1709:
1684:
1658:Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
1619:
1566:
1550:
1110:United States Bankruptcy Courts
1106:bankruptcy in the United States
934:in terms of Article 142 of the
818:enables the Court to provide a
690:New South Wales Court of Appeal
495:. Sir Francis, by authority of
345:Keeper of the King's Conscience
99:In jurisdictions following the
42:In the field of jurisprudence,
38:, in early 19th-century London.
4285:Legal doctrines and principles
2478:Harris v Digital Pulse Pty Ltd
1557:Harris v Digital Pulse Pty Ltd
1456:
1431:
1343:
1330:
1312:Black, Henry Campbell (1891).
1052:is where most cases involving
770:Shiloh Spinners Ltd v. Harding
445:Constitutional Reform Act 2005
181:and relief against forfeiture;
1:
2899:
2793:10.1080/01440365.2015.1047560
2351:Law and Contemporary Problems
1114:United States Bankruptcy Code
1072:, which developed out of the
917:Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
469:and the Chief Justice of the
2976:Watt, Gary (29 March 2007).
2630:Boston University Law Review
788:and equity, and as such the
637:
449:Chancellor of the High Court
299:, the head of which was the
268:History of equity and trusts
7:
2588:. Letter to Phillip Mazzei.
1803:Political Science Quarterly
1336:MarĂa JosĂ© FalcĂłn y Tella,
1139:
775:
605:the claims made and adding
241:New Zealand Court of Appeal
10:
4301:
3864:International legal theory
3343:International slavery laws
3338:International human rights
3333:International criminal law
2073:Klinck, Dennis R. (2010).
2038:Klinck, Dennis R. (2010).
2004:Klinck, Dennis R. (2010).
1970:Klinck, Dennis R. (2010).
1797:Goodnow, Frank J. (1891).
1189:Delaware Court of Chancery
516:the common law ever was".
408:according to the intention
265:
18:
4212:
4189:
4079:
3917:Administration of justice
3902:
3811:
3702:
3581:
3483:
3204:
3072:
2746:Laycock, Douglas (2002).
2509:Thomson, Stephen (2015).
1602:A History of American Law
1573:Tilbury, Michael (2003).
1561:[2003] NSWCA 10
1506:Garner, Bryan A. (2001).
692:, and Dr Peter Turner of
674:and John Lehane produced
3694:Basic structure doctrine
3544:Natural and legal rights
3425:Public international law
2781:Journal of Legal History
2682:Renner, Shirley (1999).
2559:White, J. R. C. (1981).
2513:. Edinburgh: Avizandum.
1799:"The Writ of Certiorari"
1628:Equity in Commercial Law
1282:Titi, Catharine (2021).
1262:
1112:by the enactment of the
888:Specific performance of
855:
719:law of unjust enrichment
398:statutory interpretation
256:law of unjust enrichment
3874:Principle of typicality
3348:International trade law
3064:
2482:[2003] NSWCA 10
2389:(1818) 2 Swan 402, 414.
1516:Oxford University Press
1021:specifically authorize
919:, which applies to all
878:Law Commission of India
766:Lord Simon of Glaisdale
644:High Court of Australia
558:Henry VIII enacted the
2913:. Sydney: Lawbook Co.
2854:Bryson, W. H. (2006).
2466:[2013] UKPC 20
2432:Supreme Court Act 1970
1718:The Law of Restitution
1630:. Sydney: Lawbook Co.
1542:is distinguished from
1477:[2015] UKSC 67
975:in Suits at common law
932:Supreme Court of India
848:
814:
806:
513:
402:
390:The Doctor and Student
371:
323:
317:
208:Black's Law Dictionary
39:
23:. For other uses, see
3869:Principle of legality
3628:Delegated legislation
3328:Intellectual property
2567:Holdsworth Law Review
2420:[2009] HCA 44
2404:[1985] HCA 78
2235:Earl of Oxford's Case
1469:[2012] HCA 30
1054:Delaware corporations
1031:David Dudley Field II
951:" (such as a writ of
936:Constitution of India
802:inherent jurisdiction
508:
485:Earl of Oxford's case
456:jurisdiction shopping
282:Court of Common Pleas
278:Court of King's Bench
127:Court of Common Pleas
123:Court of King's Bench
33:
4087:Barristers' chambers
4029:Legal representation
3967:Justice of the peace
3313:Financial regulation
2911:Equity in a Nutshell
2655:(5): 411. May 1916.
1368:Farnsworth, E. Allan
1231:Politics (Aristotle)
987:specific performance
983:declaratory judgment
694:Cambridge University
531:Statute of Uses 1535
426:In 1546, Chancellor
309:Provisions of Oxford
150:the law relating to
4122:Election commission
3834:Expressive function
3363:Landlord–tenant law
3262:Consumer protection
2930:Equity & Trusts
2649:Columbia Law Review
2539:The Nobile Officium
2416:Bofinger v Kingsway
2249:Watt, Gary (2020).
1915:Watt, Gary (2020).
1670:10.1093/ojls/22.1.1
874:Parliament of India
870:Specific Relief Act
721:. Scholars such as
549:equitable interests
324:ex debito justitiae
226:) that could issue
160:constructive trusts
4080:Legal institutions
3947:Lawsuit/Litigation
3937:Dispute resolution
3742:Catholic canon law
3450:State of emergency
3413:Will and testament
3137:Law of obligations
3090:Constitutional law
3080:Administrative law
3007:2014-04-07 at the
2586:"To Philip Mazzei"
2400:Muschinski v Dodds
872:was passed by the
782:courts of Scotland
590:possibly contains
428:Thomas Wriothesley
224:courts of chancery
172:equitable estoppel
40:
34:Legal equity: The
4262:
4261:
3922:Constitutionalism
3844:Law and economics
3682:Act of parliament
3420:Product liability
3373:Legal archaeology
3298:Environmental law
3292:Entertainment law
3132:International law
3030:978-0-415-41847-8
3021:Equity and Trusts
2834:on August 4, 2011
2693:978-1-84064-062-5
2601:Willard v. Tayloe
2493:Lord Hoffman, in
2252:Trusts and Equity
1918:Trusts and Equity
1894:978-1-58477-253-8
1693:Unjust Enrichment
1612:978-0-7432-8258-1
1256:Unjust enrichment
1216:Inequity aversion
1184:Court of Chancery
1050:Court of Chancery
1007:Willard v. Tayloe
1002:Willard v. Tayloe
972:Seventh Amendment
715:England and Wales
705:England and Wales
664:Sydney Law School
648:unjust enrichment
635:
634:
627:
592:original research
252:unjust enrichment
228:injunctive relief
184:the doctrines of
135:Court of Chancery
108:Court of Chancery
104:common law system
71:international law
48:Court of Chancery
36:Court of Chancery
4292:
4237:
4236:
4235:
4223:
4222:
4046:Question of fact
3927:Criminal justice
3257:Construction law
3252:Conflict of laws
3217:Agricultural law
3059:
3052:
3045:
3036:
3035:
2991:
2967:
2943:
2924:
2894:
2893:
2891:
2889:
2874:
2868:
2867:
2850:
2844:
2843:
2841:
2839:
2819:
2813:
2812:
2776:
2770:
2769:
2753:
2743:
2737:
2735:
2731:
2725:
2719:
2717:
2713:
2704:
2698:
2697:
2679:
2673:
2672:
2644:
2638:
2637:
2627:
2619:
2610:
2608:
2604:
2596:
2590:
2589:
2581:
2575:
2574:
2564:
2556:
2550:
2549:
2547:
2545:
2531:
2525:
2524:
2506:
2500:
2491:
2485:
2475:
2469:
2468: at para. 20
2459:
2453:
2444:
2438:
2429:
2423:
2413:
2407:
2396:
2390:
2382:
2376:
2374:
2342:
2336:
2335:
2333:
2331:
2305:
2296:
2295:
2273:
2267:
2266:
2246:
2240:
2238:
2230:
2224:
2223:
2221:
2219:
2193:
2180:
2179:
2177:
2175:
2149:
2138:
2137:
2135:
2133:
2107:
2098:
2097:
2095:
2093:
2070:
2064:
2062:
2060:
2058:
2035:
2029:
2028:
2026:
2024:
2001:
1995:
1994:
1992:
1990:
1967:
1958:
1957:
1939:
1933:
1932:
1912:
1899:
1898:
1878:
1867:
1866:
1864:
1862:
1836:
1827:
1826:
1794:
1785:
1784:
1774:
1757:
1756:
1738:
1732:
1731:
1713:
1707:
1706:
1688:
1682:
1680:
1652:
1643:
1641:
1623:
1617:
1616:
1596:
1590:
1589:
1582:UNSW Law Journal
1579:
1570:
1564:
1554:
1548:
1547:
1513:
1503:
1497:
1496:
1486:
1480:
1460:
1454:
1453:
1435:
1429:
1428:
1410:
1399:
1398:
1396:
1394:
1364:
1358:
1347:
1341:
1334:
1328:
1327:
1325:
1323:
1309:
1298:
1297:
1279:
1221:Maxims of equity
1210:Ex aequo et bono
1204:Equitable remedy
1158:
1157:
1149:
993:Thomas Jefferson
910:(ss. 36–42)
851:
849:casus improvisus
817:
811:
790:Court of Session
630:
623:
619:
616:
610:
607:inline citations
583:
582:
575:
489:Attorney General
405:
374:
352:that the King's
349:Francis Palgrave
326:
320:
214:". Before 1873,
117:
69:systems, and in
56:courts of equity
21:equitable remedy
4300:
4299:
4295:
4294:
4293:
4291:
4290:
4289:
4265:
4264:
4263:
4258:
4231:
4217:
4208:
4185:
4176:Political party
4149:Legal education
4137:Law enforcement
4117:Court of equity
4075:
4051:Question of law
4004:Practice of law
3984:Judicial review
3898:
3849:Legal formalism
3829:Comparative law
3824:Contract theory
3807:
3727:Legal pluralism
3698:
3687:Act of Congress
3611:Executive order
3577:
3479:
3398:Nationality law
3323:Immigration law
3247:Competition law
3200:
3068:
3063:
3009:Wayback Machine
2998:
2988:
2964:
2940:
2921:
2902:
2897:
2887:
2885:
2875:
2871:
2851:
2847:
2837:
2835:
2828:"Circuit Court"
2826:
2820:
2816:
2777:
2773:
2766:
2744:
2740:
2733:
2727:
2726:
2722:
2715:
2707:
2705:
2701:
2694:
2680:
2676:
2661:10.2307/1110409
2646:
2645:
2641:
2620:
2613:
2606:
2598:
2597:
2593:
2582:
2578:
2557:
2553:
2543:
2541:
2533:
2532:
2528:
2521:
2507:
2503:
2492:
2488:
2476:
2472:
2460:
2456:
2445:
2441:
2430:
2426:
2414:
2410:
2397:
2393:
2386:Gee v Pritchard
2383:
2379:
2363:10.2307/1192175
2343:
2339:
2329:
2327:
2325:
2306:
2299:
2293:
2274:
2270:
2263:
2247:
2243:
2232:
2231:
2227:
2217:
2215:
2213:
2194:
2183:
2173:
2171:
2169:
2150:
2141:
2131:
2129:
2127:
2108:
2101:
2091:
2089:
2087:
2071:
2067:
2056:
2054:
2052:
2036:
2032:
2022:
2020:
2018:
2002:
1998:
1988:
1986:
1984:
1968:
1961:
1954:
1940:
1936:
1929:
1913:
1902:
1895:
1879:
1870:
1860:
1858:
1856:
1837:
1830:
1815:10.2307/2139490
1795:
1788:
1775:
1760:
1753:
1739:
1735:
1728:
1714:
1710:
1703:
1689:
1685:
1653:
1646:
1638:
1624:
1620:
1613:
1597:
1593:
1577:
1571:
1567:
1555:
1551:
1530:
1504:
1500:
1488:
1487:
1483:
1461:
1457:
1450:
1436:
1432:
1425:
1411:
1402:
1392:
1390:
1388:
1372:Sheppard, Steve
1365:
1361:
1348:
1344:
1335:
1331:
1321:
1319:
1310:
1301:
1294:
1280:
1269:
1265:
1260:
1251:Undue influence
1199:Equitable right
1194:Economic equity
1169:Court of equity
1164:
1152:
1144:
1142:
997:court of equity
944:
892:(ss. 9–25)
858:
844:statutory power
815:nobile officium
808:nobile officium
804:and called the
778:
743:Lewin on Trusts
707:
702:
659:New South Wales
640:
631:
620:
614:
611:
596:
584:
580:
573:
560:Statute of Uses
533:
333:cause of action
301:Lord Chancellor
290:King of England
274:Norman Conquest
270:
264:
177:relief against
139:Judicature Acts
115:
97:
28:
17:
12:
11:
5:
4298:
4288:
4287:
4282:
4277:
4260:
4259:
4257:
4256:
4249:
4242:
4228:
4225:Law portal
4213:
4210:
4209:
4207:
4206:
4205:
4204:
4193:
4191:
4187:
4186:
4184:
4183:
4178:
4173:
4168:
4163:
4158:
4157:
4156:
4146:
4145:
4144:
4134:
4129:
4124:
4119:
4114:
4109:
4104:
4099:
4094:
4089:
4083:
4081:
4077:
4076:
4074:
4073:
4068:
4063:
4061:Trial advocacy
4058:
4053:
4048:
4043:
4042:
4041:
4036:
4031:
4026:
4021:
4016:
4011:
4001:
3996:
3991:
3986:
3981:
3976:
3975:
3974:
3969:
3959:
3954:
3949:
3944:
3939:
3934:
3929:
3924:
3919:
3914:
3908:
3906:
3900:
3899:
3897:
3896:
3891:
3886:
3881:
3876:
3871:
3866:
3861:
3856:
3851:
3846:
3841:
3836:
3831:
3826:
3821:
3815:
3813:
3809:
3808:
3806:
3805:
3800:
3795:
3790:
3785:
3784:
3783:
3773:
3772:
3771:
3766:
3761:
3756:
3751:
3746:
3745:
3744:
3729:
3724:
3719:
3714:
3708:
3706:
3700:
3699:
3697:
3696:
3691:
3690:
3689:
3684:
3679:
3669:
3668:
3667:
3657:
3652:
3647:
3642:
3641:
3640:
3635:
3630:
3620:
3619:
3618:
3613:
3608:
3598:
3593:
3591:Ballot measure
3587:
3585:
3579:
3578:
3576:
3575:
3570:
3568:Legal treatise
3565:
3564:
3563:
3558:
3548:
3547:
3546:
3536:
3534:Letters patent
3531:
3526:
3525:
3524:
3514:
3509:
3504:
3495:
3489:
3487:
3485:Sources of law
3481:
3480:
3478:
3477:
3472:
3470:Unenforced law
3467:
3462:
3457:
3452:
3447:
3442:
3437:
3432:
3427:
3422:
3417:
3416:
3415:
3410:
3400:
3395:
3390:
3385:
3380:
3375:
3370:
3365:
3360:
3355:
3350:
3345:
3340:
3335:
3330:
3325:
3320:
3315:
3310:
3305:
3300:
3295:
3289:
3284:
3279:
3274:
3269:
3264:
3259:
3254:
3249:
3244:
3242:Commercial law
3239:
3234:
3229:
3224:
3219:
3214:
3208:
3206:
3202:
3201:
3199:
3198:
3193:
3188:
3183:
3182:
3181:
3171:
3166:
3161:
3160:
3159:
3154:
3144:
3139:
3134:
3129:
3124:
3119:
3114:
3109:
3108:
3107:
3097:
3092:
3087:
3082:
3076:
3074:
3070:
3069:
3062:
3061:
3054:
3047:
3039:
3033:
3032:
3017:
3012:
2997:
2996:External links
2994:
2993:
2992:
2987:978-0199203161
2986:
2969:
2968:
2962:
2945:
2944:
2938:
2925:
2920:978-0455228808
2919:
2901:
2898:
2896:
2895:
2869:
2845:
2814:
2787:(2): 152–191.
2771:
2764:
2738:
2720:
2699:
2692:
2674:
2639:
2611:
2591:
2576:
2551:
2526:
2520:978-1904968337
2519:
2501:
2486:
2484:, 56 NSWLR 298
2470:
2454:
2439:
2424:
2408:
2406:, 160 CLR 583.
2391:
2377:
2337:
2323:
2297:
2291:
2268:
2261:
2241:
2225:
2211:
2181:
2167:
2139:
2125:
2099:
2085:
2065:
2050:
2030:
2016:
1996:
1982:
1959:
1952:
1934:
1927:
1900:
1893:
1868:
1854:
1828:
1809:(3): 493–536.
1786:
1758:
1751:
1733:
1726:
1708:
1701:
1683:
1644:
1636:
1618:
1611:
1591:
1565:
1549:
1528:
1498:
1481:
1455:
1448:
1440:Snell's Equity
1430:
1423:
1400:
1386:
1359:
1342:
1338:Equity and Law
1329:
1299:
1292:
1266:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1258:
1253:
1248:
1243:
1238:
1233:
1228:
1226:Plea in equity
1223:
1218:
1213:
1206:
1201:
1196:
1191:
1186:
1181:
1176:
1171:
1165:
1163:
1162:
1141:
1138:
943:
940:
912:
911:
905:
902:
899:
896:
893:
886:
857:
854:
777:
774:
754:House of Lords
739:Snell's Equity
727:Andrew Burrows
706:
703:
701:
700:United Kingdom
698:
672:William Gummow
639:
636:
633:
632:
587:
585:
578:
572:
569:
532:
529:
447:, leaving the
383:and in way of
329:form of action
266:Main article:
263:
260:
205:
204:
197:
182:
175:
169:
163:
96:
93:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4297:
4286:
4283:
4281:
4278:
4276:
4273:
4272:
4270:
4255:
4254:
4250:
4248:
4247:
4243:
4241:
4240:
4229:
4227:
4226:
4221:
4215:
4214:
4211:
4203:
4200:
4199:
4198:
4195:
4194:
4192:
4188:
4182:
4179:
4177:
4174:
4172:
4169:
4167:
4164:
4162:
4159:
4155:
4152:
4151:
4150:
4147:
4143:
4140:
4139:
4138:
4135:
4133:
4130:
4128:
4125:
4123:
4120:
4118:
4115:
4113:
4110:
4108:
4107:Civil society
4105:
4103:
4100:
4098:
4095:
4093:
4090:
4088:
4085:
4084:
4082:
4078:
4072:
4069:
4067:
4066:Trier of fact
4064:
4062:
4059:
4057:
4054:
4052:
4049:
4047:
4044:
4040:
4037:
4035:
4032:
4030:
4027:
4025:
4022:
4020:
4017:
4015:
4012:
4010:
4007:
4006:
4005:
4002:
4000:
3997:
3995:
3992:
3990:
3987:
3985:
3982:
3980:
3977:
3973:
3970:
3968:
3965:
3964:
3963:
3960:
3958:
3955:
3953:
3952:Legal opinion
3950:
3948:
3945:
3943:
3940:
3938:
3935:
3933:
3932:Court-martial
3930:
3928:
3925:
3923:
3920:
3918:
3915:
3913:
3910:
3909:
3907:
3905:
3904:Jurisprudence
3901:
3895:
3892:
3890:
3887:
3885:
3882:
3880:
3877:
3875:
3872:
3870:
3867:
3865:
3862:
3860:
3857:
3855:
3852:
3850:
3847:
3845:
3842:
3840:
3837:
3835:
3832:
3830:
3827:
3825:
3822:
3820:
3817:
3816:
3814:
3810:
3804:
3801:
3799:
3796:
3794:
3793:Statutory law
3791:
3789:
3788:Socialist law
3786:
3782:
3781:Byzantine law
3779:
3778:
3777:
3774:
3770:
3767:
3765:
3762:
3760:
3757:
3755:
3752:
3750:
3747:
3743:
3740:
3739:
3738:
3735:
3734:
3733:
3732:Religious law
3730:
3728:
3725:
3723:
3720:
3718:
3715:
3713:
3710:
3709:
3707:
3705:
3704:Legal systems
3701:
3695:
3692:
3688:
3685:
3683:
3680:
3678:
3675:
3674:
3673:
3672:Statutory law
3670:
3666:
3663:
3662:
3661:
3658:
3656:
3653:
3651:
3648:
3646:
3643:
3639:
3636:
3634:
3631:
3629:
3626:
3625:
3624:
3621:
3617:
3614:
3612:
3609:
3607:
3604:
3603:
3602:
3599:
3597:
3594:
3592:
3589:
3588:
3586:
3584:
3580:
3574:
3571:
3569:
3566:
3562:
3559:
3557:
3554:
3553:
3552:
3549:
3545:
3542:
3541:
3540:
3537:
3535:
3532:
3530:
3527:
3523:
3520:
3519:
3518:
3515:
3513:
3510:
3508:
3505:
3503:
3502:Statutory law
3499:
3496:
3494:
3491:
3490:
3488:
3486:
3482:
3476:
3473:
3471:
3468:
3466:
3463:
3461:
3460:Transport law
3458:
3456:
3453:
3451:
3448:
3446:
3443:
3441:
3438:
3436:
3433:
3431:
3428:
3426:
3423:
3421:
3418:
3414:
3411:
3409:
3406:
3405:
3404:
3401:
3399:
3396:
3394:
3391:
3389:
3386:
3384:
3381:
3379:
3378:Legal fiction
3376:
3374:
3371:
3369:
3366:
3364:
3361:
3359:
3356:
3354:
3351:
3349:
3346:
3344:
3341:
3339:
3336:
3334:
3331:
3329:
3326:
3324:
3321:
3319:
3316:
3314:
3311:
3309:
3308:Financial law
3306:
3304:
3301:
3299:
3296:
3293:
3290:
3288:
3285:
3283:
3280:
3278:
3275:
3273:
3270:
3268:
3267:Corporate law
3265:
3263:
3260:
3258:
3255:
3253:
3250:
3248:
3245:
3243:
3240:
3238:
3235:
3233:
3230:
3228:
3225:
3223:
3220:
3218:
3215:
3213:
3210:
3209:
3207:
3203:
3197:
3194:
3192:
3191:Statutory law
3189:
3187:
3184:
3180:
3177:
3176:
3175:
3172:
3170:
3167:
3165:
3162:
3158:
3155:
3153:
3150:
3149:
3148:
3145:
3143:
3140:
3138:
3135:
3133:
3130:
3128:
3125:
3123:
3120:
3118:
3115:
3113:
3110:
3106:
3103:
3102:
3101:
3098:
3096:
3093:
3091:
3088:
3086:
3083:
3081:
3078:
3077:
3075:
3073:Core subjects
3071:
3067:
3060:
3055:
3053:
3048:
3046:
3041:
3040:
3037:
3031:
3027:
3023:
3022:
3018:
3016:
3013:
3010:
3006:
3003:
3000:
2999:
2989:
2983:
2979:
2974:
2973:
2972:
2965:
2959:
2955:
2950:
2949:
2948:
2941:
2935:
2931:
2926:
2922:
2916:
2912:
2907:
2906:
2905:
2884:
2880:
2873:
2865:
2861:
2857:
2849:
2833:
2829:
2824:
2818:
2810:
2806:
2802:
2798:
2794:
2790:
2786:
2782:
2775:
2767:
2761:
2757:
2752:
2751:
2742:
2730:
2724:
2712:
2711:
2703:
2695:
2689:
2685:
2678:
2670:
2666:
2662:
2658:
2654:
2650:
2643:
2635:
2631:
2626:
2618:
2616:
2603:
2602:
2595:
2587:
2580:
2572:
2568:
2563:
2555:
2540:
2536:
2530:
2522:
2516:
2512:
2505:
2498:
2497:
2490:
2483:
2479:
2474:
2467:
2463:
2458:
2452:
2448:
2443:
2437:
2433:
2428:
2421:
2417:
2412:
2405:
2401:
2395:
2388:
2387:
2381:
2372:
2368:
2364:
2360:
2356:
2352:
2348:
2341:
2326:
2324:9780198812609
2320:
2316:
2315:
2310:
2304:
2302:
2294:
2288:
2284:
2278:
2272:
2264:
2262:9780198854142
2258:
2254:
2253:
2245:
2237:
2236:
2229:
2214:
2212:9780198812609
2208:
2204:
2203:
2198:
2192:
2190:
2188:
2186:
2170:
2168:9780198812609
2164:
2160:
2159:
2154:
2148:
2146:
2144:
2128:
2126:9780198812609
2122:
2118:
2117:
2112:
2106:
2104:
2088:
2086:9781317161950
2082:
2078:
2077:
2069:
2053:
2051:9781317161950
2047:
2043:
2042:
2034:
2019:
2017:9781317161950
2013:
2009:
2008:
2000:
1985:
1983:9781317161950
1979:
1975:
1974:
1966:
1964:
1955:
1949:
1945:
1938:
1930:
1928:9780198854142
1924:
1920:
1919:
1911:
1909:
1907:
1905:
1896:
1890:
1886:
1885:
1877:
1875:
1873:
1857:
1855:9781584771371
1851:
1847:
1846:
1841:
1835:
1833:
1824:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1793:
1791:
1782:
1781:
1773:
1771:
1769:
1767:
1765:
1763:
1754:
1752:9780198726388
1748:
1744:
1737:
1729:
1727:9780199296521
1723:
1719:
1712:
1704:
1702:9780199276981
1698:
1694:
1687:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1651:
1649:
1639:
1637:0-455-22208-8
1633:
1629:
1622:
1614:
1608:
1604:
1603:
1595:
1587:
1583:
1576:
1569:
1562:
1558:
1553:
1546:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1531:
1529:9780195077698
1525:
1521:
1517:
1512:
1511:
1502:
1495:
1491:
1485:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1459:
1451:
1449:9780414051607
1445:
1441:
1434:
1426:
1424:9780409332254
1420:
1416:
1409:
1407:
1405:
1389:
1387:9780199733101
1383:
1379:
1378:
1373:
1369:
1363:
1356:
1352:
1346:
1339:
1333:
1317:
1316:
1308:
1306:
1304:
1295:
1293:9780198868002
1289:
1285:
1278:
1276:
1274:
1272:
1267:
1257:
1254:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1241:Statutory law
1239:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1217:
1214:
1212:
1211:
1207:
1205:
1202:
1200:
1197:
1195:
1192:
1190:
1187:
1185:
1182:
1180:
1177:
1175:
1172:
1170:
1167:
1166:
1161:
1156:
1151:
1150:
1147:
1137:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1117:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1090:guardianships
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1074:law of trusts
1071:
1070:corporate law
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1042:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1026:
1024:
1020:
1014:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1003:
998:
994:
990:
988:
984:
980:
976:
973:
969:
965:
964:trier of fact
960:
958:
954:
953:habeas corpus
950:
942:United States
939:
937:
933:
929:
924:
922:
918:
909:
906:
903:
900:
897:
894:
891:
887:
884:
883:
882:
879:
875:
871:
867:
863:
853:
850:
845:
841:
837:
833:
829:
825:
821:
816:
810:
809:
803:
799:
795:
792:(the supreme
791:
787:
783:
773:
771:
767:
763:
759:
758:The Scaptrade
755:
750:
748:
744:
740:
736:
732:
728:
724:
720:
716:
712:
697:
695:
691:
687:
683:
679:
678:
673:
669:
668:Roddy Meagher
665:
660:
657:The state of
655:
653:
649:
645:
629:
626:
618:
615:November 2007
608:
604:
600:
594:
593:
588:This article
586:
577:
576:
568:
564:
561:
556:
552:
550:
546:
542:
538:
528:
524:
522:
517:
512:
507:
506:'s aphorism:
505:
500:
498:
494:
493:Francis Bacon
490:
486:
482:
481:
480:habeas corpus
476:
472:
468:
463:
461:
457:
452:
450:
446:
442:
438:
433:
429:
424:
422:
421:Thomas Wolsey
416:
412:
409:
404:
400:derived from
399:
394:
392:
391:
386:
382:
377:
373:
368:
364:
358:
355:
350:
346:
340:
336:
334:
330:
325:
319:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
293:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
269:
259:
257:
253:
247:
244:
242:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
220:money damages
217:
213:
209:
202:
198:
195:
191:
187:
183:
180:
176:
173:
170:
167:
166:fiduciary law
164:
161:
157:
153:
149:
148:
147:
143:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
119:
113:
109:
105:
102:
92:
90:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
59:
57:
53:
49:
45:
37:
32:
26:
22:
4275:Equity (law)
4251:
4244:
4230:
4216:
3989:Jurisdiction
3957:Legal remedy
3912:Adjudication
3812:Legal theory
3650:Ratification
3645:Promulgation
3616:Proclamation
3596:Codification
3529:Human rights
3517:Divine right
3507:Constitution
3475:Women in law
3393:Military law
3388:Marriage law
3383:Maritime law
3282:Election law
3222:Aviation law
3212:Abortion law
3164:Property law
3121:
3100:Criminal law
3020:
2977:
2970:
2953:
2946:
2929:
2910:
2903:
2886:. Retrieved
2882:
2872:
2863:
2859:
2848:
2836:. Retrieved
2832:the original
2817:
2784:
2780:
2774:
2749:
2741:
2736: (2002).
2728:
2723:
2708:
2702:
2683:
2677:
2652:
2648:
2642:
2633:
2629:
2609: (1869).
2599:
2594:
2579:
2570:
2566:
2554:
2542:. Retrieved
2538:
2529:
2510:
2504:
2495:
2489:
2477:
2473:
2461:
2457:
2446:
2442:
2431:
2427:
2415:
2411:
2399:
2394:
2384:
2380:
2354:
2350:
2340:
2328:. Retrieved
2313:
2282:
2279:; quoted in
2276:
2271:
2251:
2244:
2233:
2228:
2216:. Retrieved
2201:
2172:. Retrieved
2157:
2130:. Retrieved
2115:
2092:November 11,
2090:. Retrieved
2075:
2068:
2057:November 11,
2055:. Retrieved
2040:
2033:
2023:November 11,
2021:. Retrieved
2006:
1999:
1989:November 11,
1987:. Retrieved
1972:
1943:
1937:
1917:
1883:
1859:. Retrieved
1844:
1806:
1802:
1779:
1742:
1736:
1717:
1711:
1692:
1686:
1661:
1657:
1627:
1621:
1601:
1594:
1585:
1581:
1568:
1556:
1552:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1533:
1509:
1501:
1493:
1489:
1484:
1472:
1464:
1458:
1439:
1433:
1414:
1393:November 17,
1391:. Retrieved
1376:
1362:
1355:Common Pleas
1351:King's Bench
1345:
1337:
1332:
1320:. Retrieved
1314:
1283:
1208:
1134:interpleader
1126:counterclaim
1118:
1043:
1027:
1022:
1015:
1006:
1000:
991:
974:
961:
945:
925:
921:civil courts
913:
859:
820:legal remedy
779:
769:
761:
757:
751:
746:
742:
738:
708:
686:Mark Leeming
682:Dyson Heydon
675:
656:
641:
621:
612:
589:
565:
557:
553:
534:
525:
518:
514:
509:
501:
497:King James I
478:
471:King's Bench
464:
453:
425:
417:
413:
395:
388:
378:
359:
341:
337:
294:
271:
248:
245:
230:(that is, a
211:
207:
206:
186:contribution
144:
120:
98:
86:
78:
60:
43:
41:
4161:Legislature
4092:Bureaucracy
3889:Rule of man
3884:Rule of law
3859:Libertarian
3722:Chinese law
3623:Legislation
3573:Regulations
3561:Law reports
3539:Natural law
3435:Reparations
3430:Refugee law
3353:Jurimetrics
3294:(Media law)
3232:Banking law
3227:Amnesty law
3205:Disciplines
3142:Private law
2883:ABF Journal
2732:,
2714:,
2706:See, e.g.,
2607:75 U.S. 557
2605:,
2398:See, e.g.,
2375:At pp. 7-8.
2357:(3): 7–27.
2309:Baker, John
2275:J. Selden,
2197:Baker, John
2153:Baker, John
2111:Baker, John
1861:27 February
1664:(1): 1–16,
1236:Restitution
1130:cross-claim
1058:Mississippi
928:High Courts
923:in India.
908:Injunctions
840:legislation
838:, and when
794:civil court
723:Peter Birks
652:subrogation
504:John Selden
475:Edward Coke
381:love of God
347:, although
313:curia regis
232:court order
194:marshalling
190:subrogation
81:) and with
4280:Common law
4269:Categories
4154:Law school
4034:Prosecutor
3972:Magistrate
3759:Jewish law
3717:Common law
3638:Rulemaking
3633:Regulation
3583:Law making
3522:Divine law
3498:Legal code
3445:Sports law
3368:Law of war
3318:Health law
3303:Family law
3287:Energy law
3237:Bankruptcy
3174:Punishment
3169:Public law
2963:0199290504
2939:0409321346
2900:References
2765:0735524696
2734:534 US 204
2716:547 US 356
2330:August 26,
2292:0409493821
2277:Table Talk
2218:August 26,
2174:August 26,
2132:August 26,
1953:0199290504
1540:common law
1536:common law
1518:. p.
1179:Common law
1102:Bankruptcy
1066:New Jersey
1035:Field Code
979:injunction
968:jury trial
957:injunction
866:common law
828:common law
786:common law
599:improve it
521:Lord Eldon
460:injunction
354:conscience
305:Parliament
284:, and the
272:After the
199:equitable
129:, and the
112:common law
67:common law
52:common law
4132:Judiciary
4127:Executive
4102:The bench
4039:Solicitor
4014:Barrister
3894:Sociology
3879:Pseudolaw
3819:Anarchist
3776:Roman law
3764:Parsi law
3749:Hindu law
3737:Canon law
3712:Civil law
3665:Concordat
3556:Precedent
3465:Trust law
3440:Space law
3277:Drugs law
3147:Procedure
3085:Civil law
2801:142977209
2436:s 44
1246:Trust Law
1086:adoptions
1062:Tennessee
1041:in 1938.
890:contracts
836:precedent
832:injustice
735:Cambridge
638:Australia
603:verifying
467:Ellesmere
441:Liz Truss
432:civil law
367:canon law
363:Roman law
286:Exchequer
179:penalties
156:resulting
131:Exchequer
83:Roman law
79:epieikeia
75:Aristotle
63:civil law
4239:Category
4181:Tribunal
4166:Military
4009:Attorney
3979:Judgment
3839:Feminist
3754:Jain law
3551:Case law
3272:Cyberlaw
3179:Corporal
3157:Criminal
3127:Evidence
3117:Doctrine
3095:Contract
3005:Archived
2866:: 77–82.
2823:Arkansas
2636:(1): 32.
2451:s 5
2311:(2019).
2199:(2019).
2155:(2019).
2113:(2019).
1842:(1956).
1370:(2010).
1174:Case law
1140:See also
1094:marriage
1048:, whose
1046:Delaware
1011:contract
798:Scotland
776:Scotland
541:land law
403:aequitas
372:aequitas
318:de cursu
297:Chancery
88:aequitas
4253:Outline
4190:History
4097:The bar
4071:Verdict
4019:Counsel
3999:Justice
3854:History
3677:Statute
3493:Charter
3455:Tax law
3403:Probate
2888:18 June
2838:July 3,
2809:2600201
2669:1110409
2371:1192175
1823:2139490
1678:3600632
1544:equity.
1374:(ed.).
1122:joinder
1098:divorce
1082:probate
826:or the
824:statute
688:of the
597:Please
385:charity
216:England
201:set-off
152:express
101:English
65:and in
4171:Police
4142:Agency
4024:Lawyer
3769:Sharia
3660:Treaty
3655:Repeal
3601:Decree
3512:Custom
3408:Estate
3358:Labour
3122:Equity
3028:
2984:
2960:
2954:Equity
2936:
2917:
2807:
2799:
2762:
2690:
2667:
2544:11 May
2517:
2449:(NSW)
2434:(NSW)
2369:
2321:
2289:
2259:
2209:
2165:
2123:
2083:
2048:
2014:
1980:
1950:
1944:Equity
1925:
1891:
1852:
1821:
1749:
1724:
1699:
1676:
1634:
1609:
1526:
1446:
1421:
1384:
1322:14 May
1290:
1146:Portal
1092:, and
1060:; and
822:where
812:. The
760:case (
745:, and
731:Oxford
491:, Sir
473:, Sir
280:, the
236:trusts
212:equity
158:, and
137:. The
125:, the
44:equity
25:Equity
4246:Index
4112:Court
4056:Trial
3962:Judge
3803:Yassa
3606:Edict
3152:Civil
3105:Crime
2797:S2CID
2665:JSTOR
2480:
2464:
2418:
2402:
2367:JSTOR
1819:JSTOR
1674:JSTOR
1578:(PDF)
1559:
1475:
1467:
1263:Notes
1078:wills
949:writs
862:India
856:India
545:legal
196:; and
3994:Jury
3942:Fiqh
3798:Xeer
3196:Tort
3112:Deed
3026:ISBN
2982:ISBN
2958:ISBN
2934:ISBN
2915:ISBN
2890:2015
2840:2012
2805:SSRN
2760:ISBN
2688:ISBN
2546:2017
2515:ISBN
2332:2023
2319:ISBN
2287:ISBN
2257:ISBN
2220:2023
2207:ISBN
2176:2023
2163:ISBN
2134:2023
2121:ISBN
2094:2023
2081:ISBN
2059:2023
2046:ISBN
2025:2023
2012:ISBN
1991:2023
1978:ISBN
1948:ISBN
1923:ISBN
1889:ISBN
1863:2021
1850:ISBN
1747:ISBN
1722:ISBN
1697:ISBN
1632:ISBN
1607:ISBN
1588:(2).
1524:ISBN
1444:ISBN
1419:ISBN
1395:2020
1382:ISBN
1353:and
1324:2021
1288:ISBN
1132:and
1096:and
1088:and
1080:and
1023:only
864:the
780:The
733:and
725:and
547:and
537:uses
365:and
192:and
3066:Law
2789:doi
2756:370
2657:doi
2359:doi
1811:doi
1666:doi
1520:177
1160:Law
860:In
796:of
768:in
756:in
713:of
711:law
601:by
58:.
4271::
3500:/
2881:.
2864:41
2862:.
2858:.
2803:.
2795:.
2785:36
2783:.
2758:.
2663:.
2653:16
2651:.
2634:64
2632:.
2628:.
2614:^
2569:.
2565:.
2537:.
2365:.
2355:56
2353:.
2349:.
2300:^
2184:^
2142:^
2102:^
1962:^
1903:^
1871:^
1831:^
1817:.
1805:.
1801:.
1789:^
1761:^
1672:,
1662:22
1660:,
1647:^
1586:26
1584:.
1580:.
1532:.
1522:.
1403:^
1302:^
1270:^
1128:,
1124:,
1100:.
1084:,
985:,
981:,
959:.
852:.
749:.
741:,
696:.
670:,
654:.
551:.
258:.
243:.
188:,
154:,
3058:e
3051:t
3044:v
2990:.
2966:.
2942:.
2923:.
2892:.
2842:.
2811:.
2791::
2768:.
2696:.
2671:.
2659::
2571:6
2548:.
2523:.
2422:.
2373:.
2361::
2334:.
2265:.
2222:.
2178:.
2136:.
2096:.
2061:.
2027:.
1993:.
1956:.
1931:.
1897:.
1865:.
1825:.
1813::
1807:6
1755:.
1730:.
1705:.
1681:.
1668::
1642:.
1640:.
1615:.
1479:.
1452:.
1427:.
1397:.
1357:.
1326:.
1296:.
1148::
628:)
622:(
617:)
613:(
595:.
203:.
168:;
162:;
116:'
85:(
77:(
27:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.