Equity provides fair remedies when strict legal rules would result in an unfair outcome. It supplements but does not override common law. Equity developed in England when common law courts could not address all legal problems. A key figure was the Lord Chancellor who administered equity rulings. Major deficiencies of common law addressed by equity included incomplete remedies and procedures. Maxims of equity provide flexible principles rather than binding rules to guide equitable decisions. Key maxims include equity will provide a remedy when law cannot, equity follows law, and those seeking equity must do equity.

1. What is equity
• Equity is a legal system for obtaining a fair result when
existing laws do not provide a solution
• equity is the set of legal principles that supplement strict
rules of law where their application would operate harshly
According to Osborne –’it is primarily fairness or
natural justice’
1

2. Definition of equity
According to :
Plato “equity is a necessary element supplementary to the
imperfect generalization of legal rules”
Snell ” equity is a portion of natural justice which,
although of a nature suitable for judicial enforcement,
was for historical reasons not enforced by the Common
Law courts, an omission which was supplied by the Courts
of Chancery”
Aristotle described equity as eternal and immutable .
Blackstone defines equity as the soul and spirit of all law
2

3. Development of Equity
After the conquest of England by Normans in the 11th
century , Common Law had taken a definite shape
3 courts court of common law were kings bench,
Common Law Pleas and Exchequer
3

4. Development of Equity
If a person wants an action at common law , fees
should be remitted from Chancery
An injury party can sue only if it come under the
scope of an existing writ
If litigants could not get justice, they can sue
directly to the king
4

5. Development of Equity
The major deficiencies of common law were:
1.Incomplete or no remedies in many cases
2.Inadequate relief
3. Incomplete and defective procedure
5

6. Development of Equity
The rules of equity arose in England when the strict
limitations of common law would not solve all
problems
In 1348 the king completely assigned his equity
jurisdiction to the Chancellor
6

7. Development of Equity
• Earl of Oxford’s Case (1615) 21 ER 485
• It was decided that in cases of conflict between
common law and equity, equity was to prevail
7

8. Development of Equity
• Judicature acts 1873-75
• They created one system of court by amalgamating the
common law courts and the court of equity
• However , this did not fuse the principles of common
law and equity, which still remain as separate bodies of
rules
8

9. Equity in India
In India the common law doctrine of equity had traditionally
been followed even after it became independent in 1947
Under the 1963 “Specific Relief Act", most equitable
concepts were codified and made statutory rights, thereby
ending the discretionary role of the courts to grant equitable
reliefs.
9

10. MAXIMS OF EQUITY
• The maxims of equity may fairly be described as a set of
general principles which are said to govern the way in
which equity operates
• In contrast to the common law, maxims are more flexible,
responsive to the needs of the individual and more inclined
to take account of the parties’ conduct and worthiness.
• None of the maxims is in the nature of a binding rule.
10

11. Equity will not suffer a wrong
without a remedy
•where there is defect in the common law then equity should provide and
answer
•This maxim is a restatement of the broad legal principle: Ubi jus, ibi
remedium, "Where there is a right, there is a remedy.
•Equity will not allow the technical defects of the common law to
prevent worthy plaintiffs from obtaining redress.
example : Ashby v White
11

12. Equity follows the law
o Equity developed as a response to the defects of the common
law; however, it did not aim to override the common law
o Equity will, where possible, ensure that its own rule are in
line with the common law principles
Example : Stickland V Aldridge
12

13. equity
The maxim means that do obtain an equitable relief the plaintiff must
himself be prepared to do “equity”, that is there must be reciprocity
Example: Lodge V National Union Investment Co Ltd
13

14. He who comes to equity
come
with clean hands
•A
claimant seeking an equitable remedy must not himself be
guilty of unconscionable conduct.
•The court may therefore consider the past conduct of the
claimant.
Cleaver v Mutual Reserve Fund Life Assoc.[1892]
A woman who had murdered her husband was denied
the right to claim the payout under a life insurance written in her
favour, on the basis that she should not profit from her crime.
14

15. Delay defeats equity
a person who seeks equitable relief must do so
within a reasonable time.
also known as equity aids the vigilant , not those
who slumber /sleeps on their right.
Example: Chatrabhuj V Mansukhram AIR
1925 Bom 183
15

16. EQUITY ACTS IN PERSONAM
•It is the nature of equitable remedies that they generally
operate against the person of the defendant.
•Judgment is made against individual.
•This maxim comes in handy with regard to properties held
abroad.
•Equity can make orders affecting property outside its
jurisdiction by making orders against the person of the
defendant in the jurisdiction.
16

17. Penn V Lord Baltimore
An order of specific performance was granted to
the plaintiff who brought a boundary dispute case to
an English court, yet the land was in Maryland, in the
USA. The parties to the dispute were English and
both lived in England.
17

18. The personam maxim however has its
limitations:
1.The defendant has to be within the jurisdiction of
the court.
2.The order must not violate the legal rules of
another country.
3.The order given must be capable of being
executed without intervention of a foreign court.
18

19. Equity delights in equality
• Where two presonam have an equal right, the property will
be divided equally.
•
Equity will not play favourites.
•
If there is a dispute over property in which more
than one party has a beneficial interest, that property
will be divided equally.
•This maxim does not apply if there is evidence that
the property should be divided amongst the parties in
some other manner.
Example :MIDLAND BANK V COOKE [1995]4 ALL ER 562
19

20. MIDLAND BANK V COOKE [1995]4 ALL ER 562
Husband and wife disputed over the ownership of their
matrimonial home.
it was held that the beneficial interest belongs to spouses
should be shared equally
20

21. EQUITY LOOKS TO THE INTENT
RATHER THAN THE FORM
Equity looks to the spirit and not to the letters
It looks to the intention of the parties and not to the
words
It looks to the realities rather than to mere appearnces
21

22. For example
In a sale of land - party fails complete within
the timein common law ,its breach of contract in equity its not, it will allow reasonable time
to the party concerned
22

23. EQUITY LOOKS ON THAT AS DONE
WHICH OUGHT TO BE DONE
What one had undertaken to do, Binding his conscience,
ought to be done
For ex: A leaves 50000 to T purchase land for P .
T doesnot purchase & P dies by the time leaving
immovable to X and rest to Y.
Who should get 50000, X or Y?
23

24. EQUITY IMPUTES AN INTENTION TO
FULFIL AN OBLIGATION
If a person is under an obligation to do certain act, and he
doe some other act, which is capable of being regarded as
an act of fulfilment of his obligation
Equity in such cases presumes and imputes an intention
that the latter act was intented to be in performance of
the former
24

25. Sowden V Sowden
Husband agrees with trustees to pay 50000 to buy
land D
He never paid
But he bought land D & died
Could not bring the land into settlement
Decision- the land was purchased to fulfill his
obligation
25

26. Other maxims include
• WHERE THE EQUITIES ARE EQUAL , THE FIRST IN TIME PREVAILS
• WHERE THE EQUITIES ARE EQUAL, THE LAW PREVAILS
26

27. Thank
you
27