Understanding the Concept of Equity

Concept and definition of Equity Equity is not a word that can be said to have a precise meaning. The original idea of it is synonymous with fairness and justice. The term, equity is used in three different senses. In the first sense it means morality, honesty and uprightness. In the second sense it refers to the principle of natural justice, which experiment the fixed rules of law. In the third sense, equity consists of a set of fixed rules. It is well formulated set of rules. The term “Equity” is derived from the roman term “acquitas” which means equalization or leveling. The term equity is used in various senses, out of many the four main senses in which the term is used are: 1. Literal sense. 2. General sense. 3. Roman sense. 4. English sense. * Literal sense: The literal meaning given to equity is right as founded on the laws of the nature, fairness and justice. * General sense: In the most general sense, we call that equity which in human transaction is founded on “natural justice”, honesty and right. In this sense it means, that one should do to all men she expects to be done to him. In this way unkindness or other moral wrongs clearly fall outside the scope of equity. Definition of Equity: There are many definitions of equity each distinct from the other but all agree on the general nature of Equity, which is synonymous with natural justice, honesty and right. * Blackstone defines, Equity as the soul and spirit of all law. Positive law is construed and natural law is made by it. In this way Equity is synonymous with justice in its true and sound interpretation of the rule. * Aristotle states, Equity is the correction of the law where it is defective on account of its generality. He further added that it is equity to pardon human failings and to look to the law giver and not the law, to the spirit and not the letter. * Maitland observes that “ Equity now is that body of rules administered by English Courts of justice which were but for the option of the Judicature Acts, would be administered by those courts, which would be known as Courts of Equity { Equity is a set of rules that were once handled by special courts called Courts of Equity in England. Now, these rules are applied by regular courts, thanks to changes made by the Judicature Acts.} Classification of equity jurisdiction Under the common law it had been provided that a person who had suffered a civil injury, wanted to seek remedy, he had to prove his case to be within the limits of a form of action. The equitable jurisdiction which was exercised by the Court of Chancery, at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of nineteenth century was usually classifies in relation to common law. Under three main heads namely 1. Exclusive; 2. Concurrent; 3. Auxiliary. This scheme adopted by the great American judge, Story found general acceptation in English equity. The Exclusive jurisdiction In many cases the claim of the plaintiff was one which depended exclusively on equitable principles and the plaintiff had no right whatever against the defendant in any Court except the court of Chancery and the court of Chancery recognized such rights and granted equitable relief in such cases in exercise of its exclusive jurisdiction. The most important branch of this jurisdiction was the rights of persons claiming under trust. The common law does not recognize a trust and regarded a trustee as the owner of the land. But equity regarded the beneficiary as the owner of trust property. { In some cases, the plaintiff (the person bringing the case) could only rely on equity law for justice. These cases couldn’t be heard in any other court except the Court of Chancery. One of the most important examples of this was trusts. Common law didn’t recognize trusts, meaning the trustee (person managing the trust) was seen as the owner of the property. However, equity law saw the beneficiary (person benefiting from the trust) as the true owner.} The other important matter rights coming under the exclusive jurisdiction of equity were the rights of married woman in relation to property given to them for their separate use, mortgages, equity of redemption, election satisfaction, etc. These rights were not recognized by common law but those was recognized by the equity court. Thus it can be said that equity provided such reliefs which the common law was deficient to provide.{ Other key areas in exclusive jurisdiction included the rights of married women over property, mortgages, and matters like equity of redemption (allowing people to recover mortgaged property). These rights weren’t protected by common law but were recognized by equity courts. So, equity offered justice where common law could not.} The Concurrent jurisdiction In strict sense the concurrent jurisdiction was used in certain cases where a person had such cause of action which entitled him to sue in the Court of common law. In these cases the Court of equity gave the claimant successfully the same relief as he would have obtained from the Court of equity, and in these cases the Court of equity intervened in aid of the law by granting a remedy which would be adequate and proper for the fulfillment of the rights of the plaintiff. The concurrent jurisdiction comprised of the following cases: 1. The cases in which the rights to be enforced for which the remedies granted by court of law were totally inadequate and the chancellor granted adequate relief. 2. Those cases were the rights of the plaintiff were recognized by the common law and the reliefs granted were not sufficient, while equity also recognized those rights and provided reliefs which were sufficient. Auxiliary Jurisdiction Under auxiliary jurisdiction, equity provided reliefs to the plaintiffs when their legal rights were to be determined on the ground of some title or statements of witness. Under this jurisdiction equity provided certain procedures which were not available under the common law. If the title of the property was in the possession of a person through the court would decide it shares of the parties, equity compelled that person to produce that document in the court to decide the matter. Where the statements of the witness could decide the case, the witnesses were compelled to visit the court for the examination and cross examination of the witness. The common law courts could not the witnesses for coming to the court for making statements. The necessity of such jurisdiction arose to remove the defects of legal process and to enable the courts of law to grant complete and fuller legal redress.

* Literal sense: The literal meaning given to equity is right as founded on the laws of the nature, fairness and justice. 
* General sense: In the most general sense, we call that equity which in human transaction is founded on “natural justice”, honesty and right. In this sense it means,    that one should do to all men she expects to be done to him. In this way unkindness or other moral wrongs clearly fall outside the scope of equity.

Definition of Equity: There are many definitions of equity each distinct from the other but all agree on the general nature of Equity, which is synonymous with natural justice, honesty and right.   
* Blackstone defines, Equity as the soul and spirit of all law. Positive law is construed and natural law is made by it. In this way   Equity is synonymous with justice in its  true and sound interpretation of the rule.
* Aristotle states, Equity is the correction of the law where it is defective on account of its generality. He further added that it is equity to pardon human failings and to look to the law giver and not the law, to the spirit and not the letter. 
* Maitland observes that “ Equity now is that body of rules administered by English Courts of justice which were but for the option of the Judicature Acts, would be administered by those courts, which would be known as Courts of Equity   { Equity is a set of rules that were once handled by special courts called Courts of Equity in England. Now, these rules are applied by regular courts, thanks to changes made by the Judicature Acts.}
 Classification of equity jurisdiction 
Under the common law it had been provided that a person who had suffered a civil injury, wanted to seek remedy, he had to prove his case to be within the limits of a form of action. The equitable jurisdiction which was exercised by the Court of Chancery, at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of nineteenth century was usually classifies in relation to common law. Under three main heads namely
1. Exclusive;
2. Concurrent;
3. Auxiliary.
This scheme adopted by the great American judge, Story found general acceptation in English equity. 
The Exclusive jurisdiction
In many cases the claim of the plaintiff was one which depended exclusively on equitable principles and the plaintiff had no right whatever against the defendant in any Court except the court of Chancery and the court of Chancery recognized such rights and granted equitable relief in such cases in exercise of its exclusive jurisdiction.  The most important branch of this jurisdiction was the rights of persons claiming under trust. The common law does not recognize a trust and regarded a trustee as the owner of the land. But equity regarded the beneficiary as the owner of trust property. { In some cases, the plaintiff (the person bringing the case) could only rely on equity law for justice. These cases couldn’t be heard in any other court except the Court of Chancery. One of the most important examples of this was trusts. Common law didn’t recognize trusts, meaning the trustee (person managing the trust) was seen as the owner of the property. However, equity law saw the beneficiary (person benefiting from the trust) as the true owner.}
The other important matter rights coming under the exclusive jurisdiction of equity were the rights of married woman in relation to property given to them for their separate use, mortgages, equity of redemption, election satisfaction, etc.  These rights were not recognized by common law but those was recognized by the equity court. Thus it can be said that equity provided such reliefs which the common law was deficient to provide.{ Other key areas in exclusive jurisdiction included the rights of married women over property, mortgages, and matters like equity of redemption (allowing people to recover mortgaged property). These rights weren’t protected by common law but were recognized by equity courts. So, equity offered justice where common law could not.}
The Concurrent jurisdiction
In strict sense the concurrent jurisdiction was used in certain cases where a person had such cause of action which entitled him to sue in the Court of common law. In these cases the Court of equity gave the claimant successfully  the same relief as he would have obtained from the Court of equity, and in these cases the Court of equity intervened in aid of the law by granting a remedy which would be adequate and proper for the fulfillment of the rights of the plaintiff. 
The concurrent jurisdiction comprised of the following cases:
1. The cases in which the rights to be enforced for which the remedies granted by court of law were totally inadequate and the chancellor granted adequate relief.
2. Those cases were the rights of the plaintiff were recognized by the common law and the reliefs granted were not sufficient, while equity also recognized those rights and provided reliefs which were sufficient.

Auxiliary Jurisdiction
Under auxiliary jurisdiction, equity provided reliefs to the plaintiffs when their legal rights were to be determined on the ground of some title or statements of witness. Under this jurisdiction equity provided certain procedures which were not available under the common law. If the title of the property was in the possession of a person through the court would decide it shares of the parties, equity compelled that person to produce that document in the court to decide the matter. Where the statements of the witness could decide the case, the witnesses were compelled to visit the court for the examination and cross examination of the witness. The common law courts could not the witnesses for coming to  the court for making statements. 
The necessity of such jurisdiction arose to remove the defects of legal process and to enable the courts of law to grant complete and fuller legal redress.

Transcript for:Understanding the Concept of Equity

Transcript for:
Understanding the Concept of Equity