Equity

:A chancery is also the office building in which an ambassador houses his diplomatic mission. ...more on Wikipedia about "Chancery"

A constructive trust is a legal device called an "equitable remedy" used by courts sitting in equity to resolve claims raised by a plaintiff whose property has been converted to a profitable use by the defendant. In such a case, the court will trace the benefits accruing to the defendant through the use of the plaintiff's property, and by operation of law will deem all benefits resulting from the conversion to be held by the defendant in trust for the plaintiff, so long as they have not become intermingled with the defendant's own funds. ...more on Wikipedia about "Constructive trust"

The Delaware Court of Chancery is a court of equity in the United States state of Delaware. ...more on Wikipedia about "Delaware Court of Chancery"

In law, equitable remedies are the remedies developed and granted by the old courts of equity, such as the Courts of Chancery in England, and still available today in common law jurisdictions. Equity is said to operate on the conscience of the defendant, so an equitable remedy is always directed at a particular person, and his knowledge, state of mind and motives may be relevant to whether a remedy should be granted or not. ...more on Wikipedia about "Equitable remedy"

Equity is the name given to the portion of the legal system, in countries following the English common law tradition, that resolves disputes between persons by resorting to principles of conscience, fairness and justness. Equity comes into play typically when none of the parties to the dispute has done anything against the law, but their rights or claims are in conflict. Thus, it is to be contrasted with "law", which refers to both "statutory law" (the laws enacted by Parliament), and the " case law" (the principles set forth in the opinions given by judges when they decide cases). ...more on Wikipedia about "Equity"

Estoppel is an equitable doctrine proposing that any person who asks the courts to enforce a legal remedy should have a clear conscience. Wherever a law is broken, a right of action is created in any person who has suffered a loss (the plaintiff). This right to a remedy is enforced through the courts. In almost all cases, the state of the plaintiff's conscience will be irrelevant to obtaining relief. But, if the plaintiff has said or done something that induced the defendant to change his or her behaviour and that reliance was reasonable, the courts have a discretion to deny the remedy to the plaintiff. Hence, an estoppel is not a remedy "at law" in common law jurisdictions, but based on principles of equity. In the majority of cases, it is only a defence and it works by preventing a plaintiff from enforcing established legal rights, or from relying on a set of facts that would give rise to enforceable rights (e.g. words said or actions performed) if that enforcement or reliance would be unfair to the defendant. Because its effect is to defeat generally enforceable legal rights, the scope of the remedy is often very limited. ...more on Wikipedia about "Estoppel"

Estoppel is a legal doctrine that may be used in certain situations to prevent a person from relying upon certain rights, or upon a set of facts (eg. words said or actions performed) which is different from an earlier set of facts. ...more on Wikipedia about "Estoppel (English law)" Stay cool with http://www.shortopedia.com.

In law, laches is an equitable defense accusing an opposing party of having "sat on his rights"; as a result of this delay, the delaying party is undeserving of equitable relief. It is a form of estoppel for delay. In Latin, ...more on Wikipedia about "Laches"

The maxims of equity evolved, in Latin and eventually translated into English, as the principles applied by courts of equity in deciding cases before them. ...more on Wikipedia about "Maxims of equity"

In the law of remedies, a specific performance is a demand of a party to perform a specific act. While specific performance can be in the form of any type of forced action, it is usually used to complete a previously established transaction. It is the opposite of an injunction. Under the common law, specific performance was not a remedy, with the rights of a litigant being limited to the collection of damages. However, the courts of equity developed the remedy of specific performance as damages often could not adequately compensate someone for the inability to own a particular piece of real property, land being regarded as unique. Specific performance is often guaranteed through the remedy of a writ of possession, giving the plaintiff the right to take possession of the property in dispute. However, in the case of personal performance contracts, it may also be ensured through the threat of proceedings for contempt of court. ...more on Wikipedia about "Specific performance"

In common law legal systems, a trust is a relationship in which a person or entity (the trustee) holds legal title to certain property (the trust property or trust corpus), but is bound by a fiduciary duty to exercise that legal control for the benefit of one or more individuals or organizations (the beneficiary), who hold "beneficial" or "equitable" title. The trust is governed by the terms of the (usually) written trust agreement and local law. The entity (one or more individuals, a partnership, or a corporation) that creates the trust is called variously the trustor, settlor, grantor, donor, or creator. ...more on Wikipedia about "Trust (law) USA"

Unclean hands, sometimes clean hands doctrine, is an equitable defense in which the defendant argues that the plaintiff is not entitled to obtain an equitable remedy on account of the fact that the plaintiff is acting unethically or has acted in bad faith with respect to the subject of the complaint-that is with 'unclean hands'. The defendant has the burden of proof to show the plaintiff is not acting in good faith. The doctrine is often stated as "those seeking equity must do equity". ...more on Wikipedia about "Unclean hands"

In the law of equity, unjust enrichment means one party has conferred a benefit upon another party with the expectation he would be compensated for doing so, but has not received compensation equal to the value of the benefit conferred. The party who has unjustly enriched another may sue in restitution and is entitled to receive the fair market value of the benefit conferred upon the defendant, measured according to what one in the position of the defendant could have purchased identical goods or services from another in the position of the plaintiff at the time and place of the unjust enrichment. ...more on Wikipedia about "Unjust enrichment"

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the Wikipedia . Direct links to the original articles are in the text.
If you use exact copy or modified of this article you should preserve above paragraph and put also : It uses material from the Shortopedia article about "Equity".

MAIN PAGE

MAIN INDEX

CONTACT US