Equity Plays An Important Role For The Common Law

In Distributive Justice, Robert Nozick aims to clarify the processes of distribution that can be reasonably upheld in a free society. To do so, he examines the origins of how people legitimately come to own things and applies the least intrusive set of guidelines that can be doled out in order to guarantee the most justice possible, while also respecting individual liberty. Nozick provides the Entitlement Theory, which specifies that so long as there is justice in the acquisition and transfer of holdings (things one owns), there is no injustice or infringement upon liberties of others and the parties involved are entitled their holdings. In the event there is an injustice committed, he provides the third topic of “ the rectification of injustice in holdings.” Establishing how individuals may legitimately acquire holdings is crucial to a discussion on the liberty and rights of individuals in a free, yet cooperative society. In order to further clarify how individuals originally come to own things in society, Distributive Justice later analyzes John Locke’s Theory of Acquisition. A diminishing number of unowned resources as well as the inherent problems in a free market convolute the issue.

Merit –compare and contrast the role of judges ,lawyers and lay people within the English courts.

The distinctive body of law which is now referred to as tort arouse in the 1580’s with the first usage of the word ‘tort’ in a legal context. The general creation of ‘tort’ in a court of law was made to allow a party that has suffered harm due to the inactions or actions caused by an opposing party to impeach legal liability to the opposing party or to allow the accused party the right to defend their liability of such harms. The primary purpose of tort law Is to redress imbalances which has led to harm caused by another party this allows aggrieved parties to have the right and freedom to seek compensation for such damages as a court of law sees fit. Tort has a large distinction from other areas of law as crimes are punishable by the state, whereas as for a tort has specific consequences and allows the injured person or party the right to action. Tort’s largest outlying factor which differentiate from other areas of the law is the fact that for other areas of the law the case will classify the pursuant to their seriousness and in regards to tort this would not be the case due to the case will be decided in regards to a party’s legal liability and that the injured party receives right and just compensation for their losses.

Common law was not England’s only legal system. There were many other courts in England, however, people of England and America believed they had certain unalienable rights. One main factor of common law rights was the right to a fair trial. Through common law, the people were assured there would be an impartial judge and/or jury. Without such, the laws would be unfair and no one would receive a fair trial.

Wolsey also had a substantial effect on the justice system, reinventing the equity court based on fairness, meaning on a sense of conscience instead of a formal legal process). He was responsible for the re-establishment of the Star Chamber, Court of Chancery, dealing with simple and inexpensive cases and the Court of Requests, which made justice available to those who were unable to afford the fees usually needed for a court case. In theory this was an excellent idea and was supported by the commons as well as a number of nobles, a number of which thought they were untouchable by the law, and that this way justice would be served more effectively. Through this the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery was greatly expanded and further developed, making it possible to increase the number of cases dealt with from an estimated twelve each year to about 120 a year during the 1520 's. While he increased the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery, he limited the Court of Star Chamber and declared it as impartial, as well as declaring that it should have no influence in political matters. This had the effect that people were relying directly on the crown to settle their disputes meaning that it gained influence in the matters and that local landowners were capped in their power. During this time a number of nobles were convicted, who had thought themselves to be above the law and Wolsey made further enemies in the ranks of those close to the King.

This paper will cover topics such as; what a court is and what the purpose of the court is. This paper will define the dual court system. In addition this paper will describe the role that early legal codes, the common law and the precedent played in the development of courts. And lastly this paper will identify the role of the courts in the criminal justice system today.

Courts of equity were the Chancery courts and existed historically as an entirely separate department from the Supreme Court, imitating the historical arrangement in place in England. A primary reason for the development of the Chancery courts was to provide a means of redress where the common law provided an inadequate remedy or no remedy at all. In equity, generally the court’s power is to direct someone to act or to forbear from acting, which circumstances clearly cannot be redressed by the award of money damages.

To begin, common law originated in Medieval England in the time of King Henry II. The practice developed sending circuit judges from the King’s central court to travel throughout England to hear the various disputes. The aim of these courts (assizes) was to add consistency and fairness to the legal system. Alongside the traveling courts King Henry also established the jury system. Over time these judges recorded the information of each case they heard as well as the decisions and punishments that were ordered. This is known as case law or common law. This began a justice system that relied on the principle of stare decisis or “to stand by the decision”. This principle developed into the rule of precedent which was used to apply the previous decision to a case with similar circumstance. This system was used throughout the country and thus was known as common law. As the English began colonizing Canada they brought their legal systems with them, which greatly influenced today’s legal system.

On observing the District Court a number of distinctions from the Local Courts were immediately made apparent. Without going in to detail about the actual structure of the courts, they seemed to fit more closely with the traditional schema of a typical courtroom. In particular the larger courtrooms with more facilities combined with the barristers and magistrates wearing their wig and robes seemed to instantly uphold the ideology of justice. It is interesting to note how appearances can automatically provide an impression that justice will be upheld. The

We live in a society that holds equality as a paramount value. Most, if not all, of the Western World generally believes in equality for its citizens, not as a privilege but as a fundamental right, and not to be infringed upon except for under the most egregious of circumstances. Not only is it a right, but it is a necessity, as claimed by philosopher Simone Weil, “Equality is a vital need of the human soul” (Simone Weil, 1940). In her essay “Equality”, Weil attempts to reconcile mankind’s need for equality with the preexisting inequalities in our societies. She does this by explaining two types of equality that she has defined: quantitative inequality, the inevitable inequalities due to the conditions of privilege or disadvantage under which we are born or find ourselves victim due to no fault of our own, and qualitative inequality, the inequalities contributed exclusively to the values which we have placed on one another as a result of our quantitative inequalities. By this definition, then, Weil communicates to the reader that equality is, in many ways, a function of the respect we express to one another and that every person is due the same amount of respect from individuals as well as institutions and customs; however, though contrary to intuition, Weil’s argument that there may be a certain level of inequality essential to creating the balance between the two types on inequality has altered my understanding of the justice system.

In 1066 the Criminal courts weren’t found yet, but William placed all the courts under royal control and delivered a proclamation inviting the ordinary people of the country to get justice within his court system. Over time the English court system started to be together and consistent about their laws. After years following William’s system, common law crimes were getting equal throughout the country. Many crimes were getting enforced by the courts by reasons and experience in the past. Acts such as “common understanding” or by “public consent”. In Westminster Period time in England. It started to get stricter in their laws. They started to get facts from other trials that they remembered. “Stare decisis” came from the Westminster Period which is defined as let the decision stand. As time passed by the English Parliament were adding crimes, we also saw the Parliament and the courts were adding to the Common

This was called "Feudal Justice", and gave nobles the ability to create court cases to settle disputes between the defendants and the accused. These courts usually ended with the accused having to pay a fine, which brought considerable income to the nobles throne, however, ordeal by God and trial by combat were considered equally as effective in proving innocence. This system of justice brought the same political power of the feudal system itself, knights could not accuse the king, but peasants could call other peasants to be accused. Under this system, the daily lives of peasants could be brought into question, however, both the accused and the accuser would receive the same treatment, and if the accused was not found guilty, the accuser would receive the punishment. This created a system that discouraged the use of judicial courts for personal gain, and disallowed the ability to move higher in terms of social status("Feudal

Equity has been described as a ‘mysterious creature’ that lies distinctly alongside the common law. In considering the statement, there is an almost linear reversal in which the remedies in equity procure a type of right not necessarily available in the common law. This peculiar jurisdiction has created consistent controversy especially in regards to the fusion of the common law and equity. To understand further, this essay will consider the relationship between equity and the common law. The development of equity alongside the common law through its history and intention, and application in case law will be imperative in the discussion of the statement. In conjunction with an analysis of fusion, it will become apparent that equitable damages were enlivened, separate to, in unfair circumstances where no rights/damages existed within the common law. In trying to tread the murky waters of the distinction yet the procedural fusion of equity and common law, the contention of this essay becomes apparent. Effectively, this essay aims to highlight that the history, intention, application and fusion fallacies regarding equity, all which point to an assertion that rights in equity are indeed the product of its remedies. Whether they are merely ‘two streams of jurisdiction, though they run in the same channel, run side by side and do not mingle their waters’, is yet to be seen.

"John, by the grace of God king of England, lord of Ireland, duke of Normandy, Aquitaine and Hazzard, and count of Anjou, to his archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls barons, justiciars, sheriffs, ministers, bailiffs and all his faithful men, greeting."1 So begins the most famous legal document of the Middle Ages. The Magna Carta was a product of the power struggle between King John and his barons in the year 1215. Although it was intended to address concerns that were specific to its time and place, it became a high water mark of legal freedom for centuries to come. This essay will examine the events that caused the Magna Carta to be written, the key provisions it contains, and the effect it had on the law of England and

Explain and critically consider the use of lay magistrates in the legal system of England and Wales.