Common Law and Equity Essay

cat valium Law and Equity EssayCommon justice origin everyy developed under(a) the inquisitorial arranging in England during the 12th and 13th centuries,11 as the collective judicial decisions that were based in tradition, custom and precedent Equity is designed from the English impartiality system and its role as a cat valium fairish play, as the communal rectitude was created and analysed the stern of candor was brought up and is now used in the august courts, the story of Equity brings us back to the days of 1066 when William the Conqueror invaded England, he tack together that there was no single system of normal land virtue but rather a system where the local courts based rulings of traditional courts, such as Shires, Boroughs and Hundreds, and employ local rules and customs to the cases. These were openly know as the customary virtues which later on became the baseations for the common police force.William I victimization subtle tactics gained control of the country and then introduced the feudal system, where each(prenominal) land belonged to the King and where he would grant areas of land to those people who back up him and were willing to help him. He made himself available to any landlord who had a dispute or problem and who could non get redress from his lord. This estimation of applying directly to the King became known as the Kings rightness and became available to everyone. This Kings Justice was administered by the Curia Regis (Kings Court), which was a body of advisers to the King. The Curia Regis would apply a system of rules which applied to whole country thus it became known as the common law which applied in a series of Royal Courts which were erected as judgment of conviction came to pass.At first people recognised that this law was indeed fair and with it beingness common to England was just.However, later problems were found with this law deuce in specificThe fact that there were only one remedy available, rem ediation soon became a problem. Damage being money ordered to be paid as compensation for injury or loss. It soon became a common issue that remedy was not always the appropriate wee of remedy and this would fork up no significant concluding impact in spite of appearance cases.The other major issue was that a civil treat, legal action to protect a private civil right or to restrict a civil remedy, could only be started with a writ. A writ was a document on which was written why and what the legal basis the person was being sued.Circumstances arose that when a problem was not cover by the writ, this meant making a new document every clock time one arose, however this was stopped in the 13th century. This meant if your case was already not under a writ it was not carried forward.People found themselves very frustrated under this common law, where they found they may shake up had to settle for remedies they did not want or their case was sometimes found not tied(p) actually ta ken to the courts as it was not under the writ.As the public became dissatisfied with the system they began to petition to the King, as the stern of justice for a remedy. The King took note of the petition, which resulted in the case being taken up by the Chancellor when people found that the common law would not help them with their cases.Asif LaherGradually, over the eld he make up a large body of principles, which he had gathered from cases which he had dealt with in which he decided what he intellection was fair. These principles together then formed a law Equity.Equity can be simply thought of as fairness and was a very powerful solution of law as it overcame any problems with the common law, because of the right justification it was thought to give. It gave people a safety valve allowing them to seek different appropriate remedies and even actually be given a case when common law did not.However, the law of equity would have been useless to this day if the dispute betwi xt the cardinal would have not been resolved. Because of the conflict, a decision to resolve the two was finally made in 1616 when it was referred to King James. The dispute between the two systems was eventually resolved as a result of the Earl of Oxfords Case 1616 the vector sum of this case was that if the two were to be in conflict and may neutralise each other equity would prevail. The outcome was important as equity would have been worthless as it could not fill in the gaps of the common law unless it was dominant. Common law could just override equity if common law is more important, equity would have been powerless.After many years had gone by the judicature act 1873-1875 came into place. Before this common law and equity had separate courts. The judicature acts did not fuse the common law together, however, did fuse the administration.This is significant due to the established court structure we have today, provided that equity and common law could only be administrated b y all courts and that there would no longer be different procedures for seeking common law and equitable remedies.In conclusion they were joined into one exalted Court, they are still separate laws which have different principles, common law being the major law, and equity brought into cases when needed. Because of the fact that they have different principles and were not fused together when the administration were, they are referred to as The Twin Pillars