equity

The word ‘equity’ can be seen to have a wide range of meanings- to many it is a synonym for ‘fairness’ or justice’. Those within the legal community recognise equity as the body of rules developed and applied by the Court of Chancery; a court previously presided over by the Lord Chancellor with rules developed under his authority. The law of equity developed due to the inflexibility of the common law. Before the development of equity, The law was rigid (which was often cited as a weakness) for example, claimants would only have a successful claim in common law courts if their claim could be matched with an existing writ and even then, the only remedy available to them was damages, even in cases where monetary compensation was not seen as the most suitable remedy. However, claimants who were unsuccessful in receiving a solution in the common law courts were able to appeal directly to the sovereign, who would then delegate cases to the Lord Chancellor for a decision. The Chancellors’ role, in time, was taken over through the development of the Court of Chancery, the aims of which were to deliver ‘equitable’ or ‘fair’ decisions in cases where justice could not be achieved in the Common law Courts. The creation of equity as a system of law was to serve as a means by which the English legal system could strike the balance between the rule-making process and the need to achieve fair results in individual and separate circumstances.

Both the Common law Courts and the Court of Chancery operated separately, which inevitably lead to conflict between the two in instances where the courts delivered separate decisions. It wasn’t until 1615 that this situation was resolved in the Earl of Oxford’s case1, where it was established that when there is a “conflict between equity and common law; equity must be seen to prevail”; a maxim that has since been embodied in statute, in the Senior Courts Act 19812. Prior to the Judicature Acts 1873 – 1875, the two courts continued to