Back
to top
Equity
Watch this threadPage 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
sim1_
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
“Equity is probably best understood as being a blend of strict rules and discretionary principles. One of the principal attributes of English law is its flexibility … In the light of this recognition that there may be benefits behind different types of rules in different situations, we should identify one theme which runs through much of the scholarly criticism of equity: the suggestion being that equity is simply too conceptually messy to be useful.” Alastair Hudson, Great Debates in Equity and Trusts (Palgrave 2014) 20-21.
Critically analyse this statement, citing specific examples of Equity’s ‘flexibility’ in support of your arguments.
I am struggling to understand how to start this question???
Critically analyse this statement, citing specific examples of Equity’s ‘flexibility’ in support of your arguments.
I am struggling to understand how to start this question???
0
reply
Mimir
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Dunns
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report
#3
I think we go to the same uni because ive got this exact question due as well.
By what i understand of the question, I'm looking at the concept of equity (that includes what it is, how it came to be), then arguing why the concept might be considered as messy/ and arguing why it isn't. within that answer discussing the flexibility of equitible principles in support of my argument. for example if im arguing that equity is messy, perhaps i would cite an equitable principle that i believe is very flexible hence making it messy. Or an equitable principle that is not flexible and due to the fact that it isnt flexible, it doesnt tailor to the needs of the law, hence making it messy. Or the rigidity of equity (based on certain principles) makes equity straightforward.
The question is quite simple if you strip away all the jargon. I hope this has helped you and not confused you!
By what i understand of the question, I'm looking at the concept of equity (that includes what it is, how it came to be), then arguing why the concept might be considered as messy/ and arguing why it isn't. within that answer discussing the flexibility of equitible principles in support of my argument. for example if im arguing that equity is messy, perhaps i would cite an equitable principle that i believe is very flexible hence making it messy. Or an equitable principle that is not flexible and due to the fact that it isnt flexible, it doesnt tailor to the needs of the law, hence making it messy. Or the rigidity of equity (based on certain principles) makes equity straightforward.
The question is quite simple if you strip away all the jargon. I hope this has helped you and not confused you!
0
reply
sim1_
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Hey, maybe we do! But I have argued that it is flexible in the sense that its a good thing because sometimes common law can be too rigorous and strict. So it's a good thing that there are exceptions within the law and its a positive thing...
But I have also added some points under constructive trusts and fiduciary duties which show otherwise, so i have counter argued in a way but the body of my argument remains that equity is flexible and this is a good thing.
But I have also added some points under constructive trusts and fiduciary duties which show otherwise, so i have counter argued in a way but the body of my argument remains that equity is flexible and this is a good thing.
0
reply
Dunns
Badges:
0
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
