EQUITY AND TRUSTS

Q.1. Explain the Origin and Development of Equity under Various Legal Systems

I. Introduction

Equity refers to a set of legal principles that supplement strict rules of law where their
application would operate harshly or unjustly. The origin and development of equity can be
traced back to various legal systems, particularly in England, but its influence and adaptation
are also seen in other jurisdictions like India and the United States.

II. Origin and Development of Equity in England

1. Common Law and Its Limitations:

o Early English law was rigid and formalistic.

o Remedies were limited (mainly damages), and writ system was inflexible.

o Litigants who were denied justice under common law petitioned the King.

2. Role of the King and Chancellor:

o The King delegated petitions to the Lord Chancellor, considered the "Keeper
of the King's Conscience."

o The Chancellor decided cases based on principles of fairness, conscience, and

justice.

3. Court of Chancery:

o Over time, a separate court emerged — the Court of Chancery — dealing

exclusively with matters of equity.

o It granted remedies such as injunctions, specific performance, rescission,

rectification, and equitable estoppel.

4. Judicature Acts, 1873–75:

o These Acts fused the administration of law and equity into a single system.

o However, equitable principles prevail in case of conflict between law and

equity.

III. Development of Equity in the United States

• The U.S. adopted English common law and equity.

 • Initially, some states maintained separate equity courts, while others merged them.

• The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1938) merged law and equity courts in the
federal system.

• Today, equity survives as a set of principles and remedies used by courts when legal
remedies are inadequate.

IV. Equity in India

1. Pre-colonial Era:

o Ancient Indian legal systems had elements of equity in Dharmaśāstra, which

emphasized justice, morality, and righteousness.

2. British Influence:

o British introduced equity principles during colonial rule via the Charter of
1726 and subsequent legislation.

o High Courts Act, 1861 gave Indian High Courts the power to administer both
law and equity.

o Section 9, CPC reflects equitable jurisdiction of civil courts, and several

provisions in statutes like Specific Relief Act, Indian Trusts Act, and Transfer
of Property Act embody equitable principles.

3. Post-Independence:

o Indian Constitution enshrines values of justice, fairness, and reasonableness

(Articles 14, 21), reflecting equity in public law as well.

V. Conclusion

Equity evolved as a response to the rigidity of law and has enriched legal systems by
introducing flexibility and conscience-based remedies. While its institutional form may differ
across jurisdictions, its principles continue to guide courts in delivering just and fair
outcomes.
Q.2 Define 'Equity' and Explain the Difference Between Roman and English Equity

I. Definition of Equity

Equity refers to a body of rules developed to mitigate the rigidity of common law and to
promote fairness, justice, and conscience in legal proceedings. It offers remedies where the
strict application of law results in injustice.

As per Maitland, “Equity is not a self-contained system of law, like the common law, but it is
a supplement to the common law.”

II. Roman Equity (Aequitas)

1. Origin:

o Developed as a response to the rigidity of Jus Civile (civil law applicable only
to Roman citizens).

o Introduced through Praetors, especially Praetor Peregrinus, to deliver justice

to non-citizens and in cases where civil law was inadequate.

2. Nature:

o Based on principles of natural law, good faith, and morality.

o It evolved alongside civil law and was gradually absorbed into it.

3. Remedies:

o Roman equity influenced contract law, family law, and property law through
the concept of Bona Fides (good faith).

4. Fusion with Law:

o Eventually, Roman equity became part of the codified legal system, especially
visible in the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian.

III. English Equity

1. Origin:

o Developed separately from common law due to its rigidity.

o Based on petitions to the King, delegated to the Lord Chancellor.

2. Nature:
 o Focused on conscience, fairness, and justice.

o Institutionalized as a separate system through the Court of Chancery.

3. Remedies:

o Specific performance, injunctions, rescission, rectification, equitable estoppel,

etc.

4. Fusion with Law:

o Under the Judicature Acts, 1873–75, equity and law were fused procedurally,
but equity prevails in case of conflict.

IV. Key Differences Between Roman and English Equity

Basis Roman Equity English Equity

From Praetors supplementing civil From Lord Chancellor addressing legal

Origin
law rigidity

Philosophy Based on natural law Based on conscience and fairness

Integration Merged into civil law Initially separate, merged procedurally

Influence Part of codified Roman law Exists as a separate set of principles

Good faith remedies, moral

Remedies Specific performance, injunctions, estoppel
obligations

V. Conclusion

While both Roman and English equity emerged as correctives to rigid legal systems, they
differ in origin, structure, and influence. Roman equity was philosophical and integrated,
whereas English equity evolved institutionally and continues to function as a complementary
system to common law.

Want me to turn this into revision flashcards or diagram-style notes too?

Q.3 write the short notes on

a. Equality is Equity

• This maxim means that when two or more parties have equal rights, equity will
distribute the benefits or burdens equally among them.

• It reflects the principle of impartiality and fairness.

• Often applied in partition suits, distribution of trust property, or dissolution of

partnerships.

• Example: If a person dies intestate leaving property to be divided among legal

heirs, equity presumes equal distribution unless otherwise directed.

b. He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity

• This maxim implies that a person who approaches the court seeking equitable relief
must themselves act fairly, honestly, and in good conscience.

• The court will not grant relief to someone who has acted unfairly or is trying to take
advantage of the situation.

• It's a reflection of reciprocity in justice.

• Example: A tenant seeking injunction against eviction must show that they have
paid or are willing to pay fair rent.

c. Equity Acts in Personam

• Equity does not act on the property or object (in rem), but on the conscience of the
person (in personam).

• This means the order of an equity court binds the individual, compelling them to act
or refrain from acting in a certain way.

• This principle allows equity courts to deliver justice even if the property is located
outside the court’s jurisdiction, as long as the person is within it.

• Example: In a trust case, the trustee can be directed to perform duties or transfer
property, regardless of where the trust property is situated.
Q4. Explain the Classification of Equity Jurisdiction

Equity jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to apply equitable rules and principles in
order to grant justice in situations where legal remedies are inadequate. It is broadly classified
into three main categories:

I. Exclusive Equity Jurisdiction

• In this category, the remedy is available only in equity, and no corresponding legal
remedy exists.

• The court exercises its power solely based on equitable principles.

Examples:

• Specific performance of a contract

• Injunctions

• Rectification or rescission of documents

Explanation: At common law, these remedies weren’t recognized; hence, equity filled the
gap by providing relief.

II. Concurrent Equity Jurisdiction

• Here, both law and equity provide remedies, but the equity court intervenes to offer
more suitable or flexible relief.

Examples:

• Breach of contract cases where equity provides specific performance while law
provides damages

• Cases involving fraud or mistake in contract

Explanation: Even though common law provides a remedy (like damages), equity steps
in to give a more just result (like compelling specific performance).

III. Auxiliary Equity Jurisdiction

• Equity supports the effectiveness of legal rights or proceedings by assisting legal

courts.

Examples:
 • Discovery: Forcing the disclosure of documents or facts relevant to a legal case

• Perpetuation of testimony: Preserving evidence for future use

• Bill of interpleader: Resolving conflicting claims over the same subject matter

Explanation: Equity here acts as a helper — it doesn't override the law, but ensures fair
and full legal process.

Conclusion

The classification of equity jurisdiction highlights how equity functions:

• Independently (Exclusive),

• In conjunction with law (Concurrent), and

• In support of legal processes (Auxiliary).

This ensures that justice is delivered not just according to rigid rules, but also with fairness
and conscience.