The Court of Chancery and Equity

J. Baker
{"title":"The Court of Chancery and Equity","authors":"J. Baker","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198812609.003.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter traces the history of the Court of Chancery and equity. The equitable jurisdiction derived from the extraordinary jurisdiction of the king’s council. By 1400 the chancellor had his own court and was issuing decrees in his own name. It was not tied to law but could coerce the conscience of a defendant, for instance to desist from an unconscionable suit at law. Equity was not in conflict with the law, but there was a dispute between Coke and Ellesmere in 1615 over injunctions after judgment. Most equitable principles began with relief given on the facts of individual cases, but the multitude of suits generated common principles, many of which were elucidated by Lord Nottingham. The court’s initially informal procedure became unmanageably complex as more suitors resorted to it. The later Chancery was a byword for delay and despair; the chapter ends with an account of its reform.","PeriodicalId":321735,"journal":{"name":"Introduction to English Legal History","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Introduction to English Legal History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198812609.003.0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter traces the history of the Court of Chancery and equity. The equitable jurisdiction derived from the extraordinary jurisdiction of the king’s council. By 1400 the chancellor had his own court and was issuing decrees in his own name. It was not tied to law but could coerce the conscience of a defendant, for instance to desist from an unconscionable suit at law. Equity was not in conflict with the law, but there was a dispute between Coke and Ellesmere in 1615 over injunctions after judgment. Most equitable principles began with relief given on the facts of individual cases, but the multitude of suits generated common principles, many of which were elucidated by Lord Nottingham. The court’s initially informal procedure became unmanageably complex as more suitors resorted to it. The later Chancery was a byword for delay and despair; the chapter ends with an account of its reform.
衡平法院衡平法院
本章追溯衡平法院和衡平法院的历史。衡平法源于国王会议的特别司法权。到1400年,大法官有了自己的朝廷,并以自己的名义发布法令。它不受法律约束,但可以迫使被告的良心,例如,停止在法律上不合理的诉讼。衡平法与法律并不冲突,但1615年可口可乐和埃尔斯米尔之间就判决后的禁令发生了争执。大多数公平原则都是从对个别案件事实的救济开始的,但大量的诉讼产生了共同的原则,其中许多是由诺丁汉勋爵阐明的。随着越来越多的追求者诉诸该法院,该法院最初的非正式程序变得复杂得难以管理。后来的大法官院是拖延和绝望的代名词;本章以对改革的叙述结束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信