Where There Are Equal Equities , The Law Shall Prevail

  Where There Are Equal Equities , The Law Shall Prevail 

Introduction 

According to this maxim where two persons have equitable interests in the same subject matter for example if each is equally entitled to the protection of a court of equity , and one of them in addition to his equity , also obtains the legal estate in the same subject matter then the latter will be preferred . In such a case , equity will refuse to interfere at all , and would thereby leave the parties to litigate in a court of law where , of course , the legal estate alone will be recognized .

Meaning Of The Meaning 

Equity provide no specific remedies where the parties are equal , or wher neither has been wronged

in other words A person in possession of the legal estate is entitled to priority over any person having merely an equitable estate in that property

Explanation 

When two parties wants the same things and the court cannot in good conscience say that
one has a batter right to the item then the other , the court of equity will refuse to decide and will leave the matter to the common law court .

Example 

A company that had been collecting to sale tax and turning it over to the state govt found that it had over taxed and over paid by two percent , it applied for refund but the state refused . The court of equity refused to decide the matter and to leave the law court , the court upheld the state on the ground that the money really belong to the customer of the company , since the company had no batter title to the money then the state , the court left the money with the state .

Concluding Remarks 

To Conclude i would say that a person in possession of the legal entitled priority over any person having merely an equitable estate in that property

Where Equities Are Equal The First In Time Shall Prevail

  Where Equity Are Equal The First In Time Shall Prevail  

More about the principle Where equities are equal the first in time prevail

It is also known as Qui prior Est tempore, potior  Estjure 

Introduction 

According to the maxim when there is no legal estate in the field and the question is as among the equitable estates only, the rule is that the person whose equity attached to the property first be entitled to priority over the other. 

Meaning of the Maxim 

Where there are two or more competing equitable interest , when two equities are equal the original interest such as the first in time will succeed. when there are two parties each have right to possess something then the one who acquired an interest first should prevail in equity .


For Example 

A person advertises  a Pet for sale in the classified section of New York Times the first person to see the ads offers him 500  Dollar less then the asking price But the person who is going to sell accept the cross offer , but the buyer asked , that he will take and pay the amount on Sunday , Meanwhile another buyer comes with offers more hen the previous and takes the pet himself , who owns the pet . contract law and the court equity agrees that the first buyer gets the pet and the second buyers gets his money back , Because Come first take first is the principal of equity 

Application Of the Maxim 

section 48 of transfer of property act 1882 is based on this maxim .

For Example 

A mortgages property first to B , and then to C, B's , interests having been created first in the point of time, B , will have priority over  C, . The rule applies only where equities are equal



Mortgage Executed By a  Receiver 

Where a mortgage is executed by Receiver under an order of court and by that order the court directs that such mortgage priority over any other mortgage of the earlier.


Concluding Remarks 


In conclusion I would like to conclude that where two parties have the equal right to possess something then the one who acquired an interest  first should prevail in equity.

Equity Follows The Law Explain

             Equity Follows The Law 

Introduction To The Maxim 

Equity is a law which is introduced to provide justice or appropriate remedy , if , apply any conservative law would cause injustice Or When Common law have no remedy for any wrong , the main  Purpose of  law and equity is to provide justice the ultimate object of both are to provide justice.   Equity law is not against  common law or any  procedure of common law it follows all the procedure and rule of common law it  only come into action  when there is some important circumstances disregarded by the common law rules that equity interferes. 

Meaning Of The Maxim 

Equity is not body of rules which is acting contrary to law but it is supplementary to the common law. 
In other words both have same object that is justice , when there is difference opinion  between common law and equity court then common law will prevail because equity is applied for adequate remedy .

The well known jurist Maitland has of the View 

We are not supposed to think of common law and equity as of two rival systems. Equity had come not to destroy the law , but to fulfill it, Every tittle of law was to be obeyed , but when all this had been get something might be needful , something that might be needful something that equity would require 


Equity is Supplementary To Common Law 


Equity is supplementary to law , it is understood in the following aspects 

Equity adopts and follows each and every rule of common law , in all cases where applicable 

Equity follow the analogies of law


Application And Cases Related To The Maxim 

                     Stickland Vs Aldrige 

At common law where a person intestate leaving sons and daughters  ,under the common law the eldest sons was entitled to the whole of the land to the exclusion of his younger brothers and sisters. This was undoubtedly unfair to the younger sons an daughters , While equity following the law granted them no relief , but this case is was held that if the son had induced his father not to make will  by agreeing to divide the estate with his brothers and sister after he had inherited it , the estate was decided in favour of the eldest son , who refused to make the conveyance , in that situation equity would have interfered and compelled him to carry out his promise , because it would have been against conscience to allow the son to have been against conscience to allow the son to keep the benefit of a legal estate . which he obtained by reason of his promise . This decision was held in Stickland VS Aldridge case 

Thus it could be concluded that equity does follow the law but does not allow an unfair use to be made of legal rights. 


Limitation Act  Section 18 is Based Upon This Principal 

Which Provided that if a person has not been able to exercise his right to file a suit within the period o limitation and his failure was due to the fact that the other person had fraudulently kept him an ignorance of his right then in that case limitation would commence from the date of his knowledge. 

Registration Act Section 50 Is Based On this Principal 

It provides that a registered deed will have priority over an unregistered deed relating to the same property. But equity makes an exception that in case of a subsequently registered instrument if the person in whose favour the subsequent registered instrument was made had notice of the previous unregistered instrument he will not have any priority 



Concluding Remarks 

To Conclude we would say equity is not come to destroy the law but it has come to assist the law to achieve its basic object of giving justice . 


Equity Follows The Law For Video Lecture

Section 20 and 21 of Transfer Of Property act 1882

When Unborn Person Acquires vested Interest On Transfer For his Benefit ?
  When an Interest is created for the benefit Of an Unborn Person

  He Will Acquire vested interest On His Birth

  Even Though the Possession is not Transfer to him immediately  on his birth according to the deed of transfer

  Or the deed imposed a condition that the unborn child would  get interest on the age of majority

What is Contingent interest 

When an interest is created in favour of a person with
a condition which is uncertain or the interest will be transfer on the happening  or not happening of an uncertain event is called contingent interest.

Salient Features Of Contingent  Interest 
 Contingent Interest is not vested but vest on happening of event  in Future
  The event is Uncertain
   to acquire such interest is depend on the future accident if such accident is not happened no right will be created
    when the Transferee  died before the happening of the event the transfer will fail
 
  Exceptions , When a condition is made that the interest will be transfer to the person upon attaining particular age is not contingent

Distinction Between Vested And Contingent Interest 
The Title of owner is perfect while in contingent interest it is not perfect and become perfect only on happening of uncertain event.

The interest is absolutely In vested interest   while  the contingent interest is conditional .


On the date of transfer it become effective while contingent interest only become effective on happening of uncertain event .

The vested interest is inheritable while contingent  is defeated on the death of the person if the uncertain event is not happened

The vested interest  can be transfer absolutely while the  contingent is transfer only with the uncertain condition

What is Vested Interest Section 19 Of Transfer Of Property Act 1882

What is Vested Interest  , Essential Of Section 19

When  Property is Transfer in favour of a person But not Expressly mention that when the person get whole interest in the property .
1 No Time is fixed for its taking effect OR
2    It is to take effect forthwith. Or
3   Or It is to take effect On happening of certain event which must happen .
4   It will be Vested Interest, However be defeated by the death of the Donor  before he obtain possession

its enjoyment is postponed
Prior interest is reserved to some other person
it is directed to be accumulated till the arrival of the time of enjoyment
or happening of a particular event, that to pass to another person


Essential Features Of Vested Interest

1 vested interest is unconditional
2 The vested Interest does not effect with the death of transforer
3  the vested interest create  absolute ownership in the property
4  the person can transfer and it can also inheritable

For Video Lecture 

2017 S C M R 1218 Supreme Court Of Pakistan

                  2017 S C M R 1218 


Introduction To The Judgement 

This Judgement has given by the supreme court of Pakistan which overruled the Decision of Lahore High Court, decided in 2016 . This judgement has elaborated the distinction between General law and special Law , It also Deal with the scope of general and special law.


Difference Between General And Special Law 

According to this judgement General law is one that was unrestricted in terms of its applicability to all issues covered by its subject matter, whereas special law may be restricted to certain Localities, persons or types of cases . Weather a law is general or special depended on the particular features of the statute in issue and was ultimately a question of relativity between tow or more statutes on the common subject matter . 

criminal procedure code 1898 and Pakistan penal code 1860 are both General law and would cede to any special law. 


When There IS Conflict between General and Special Law What would Prevail ?


According to the Judgement if there is conflict between General and special law than  the law, which is enacted  former would prevail over the later .


When There is Conflict Between General and Special Law in term of Punishment What would Prevail ?

According to the judgement , when two laws are providing different punishment for same offence than the law provide greater must relent in favour of the law giving the lesser punishment 


When there is Conflict Between two Special Laws containing overriding Effect  What would prevail  ?

According to the judgement When there are two special laws both having overriding effect , and they are coming against  one another, Ordinary the statute later in time would prevail over the statute prior in time , Moreover in order to determine which statute is to  prevail ,  the  judgement say that when any conflict arises between such statute then to deal with any such situation , the object of the statute the purpose and policy of the enactment and the intention to legislate such statute also be considered. 


Concluding Remarks 

To Conclude i would say that the judgement of supreme court of Pakistan has overruled the judgement of Lahore High court in explaining the difference and the overriding  effects of the statutes  over other 

Written By Adv Buzurg Shah Adel 

He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity Law Of Equity

He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity 


Introduction 


Equity courts are the courts of natural justice and fairness ,they expect that if someone is willing to enjoy the blessings of equity , then he should always be ready to return equity to others. In  a court of law , if a person comes to enforce a right and if he is legally entitled , the court will give relief in his favor  without imposing on him any duty , as the law must takes its course.

Meaning Of This Maxim, He who seeks equity must do equity 

According to this maxim to get equitable remedy from equity court the party must himself be ready to do equity, that is , a plaintiff recognize and submit to the right of his adversary , In other words the plaintiff must act fairly .

Application and Cases Related to this maxim 

This maxim apply in the following Cases 

Illegal Loans 

In sitting a side such case bargains the court would see that the money borrowed is repaid with interest .

Money Lender's  Act 1900

Under this Act it  is illegal and void to borrow money from man unregistered money lender.

Case Lodge Vs National Union Investment Co LTD

B borrowed money from M by mortgaging certain securities to him , M was a unregistered money lender the contract was illegal and therefore void , B sued M for return of the securities, the court refused to make an order except upon the terms that B should repay the money which had been advanced to him. 

Doctrine Of Election 

Where a donor A gives his property to B and in the same instrument purports to give B's property to C , B , Will be put to an election , either accept the benefit granted to him by the donor and give. away his own property to C, or retain his own property and refuse to accept the property of A condition . But B can not retain property and at same time take property of A,.

Consolidation of mortgages

In certain Cases a person who has become entitled to two mortgages made by the same mortgagor 

may consolidate the mortgages and refuse to permit the exercise of the equitable right to redeem one mortgage without the other. 

Notice To Redeem Mortgage 

A mortgagor who wishes to exercise his equitable right to redeem his mortgage must give his mortgage reasonable notice of his intention.

Equitable Estoppel 

Promissory estoppel arises where a party has expressly or implied , by his conduct or by negligence made  a statement of fact, or so conducted himself that another would reasonably understand that he made a promise thereon , then the party who made promise has to carry out his promise



Restitution of benefits on cancellation of transaction 

it is proper justice to return the benefits of a contract which was voidable and equity enforced this principles in cases where it granted relief of recession of a contract . A PARTY CAN NOT be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong .


Set Off


Where there have been mutual credits, mutual debts or other natural dealings between the debtor and any creditor, the sum due from one party is to be set off against any sum due from the other party , and only the balance of the account is to be claimed or paid on either side respectively.


Limitations

The demand for an equitable relief must arise from a suit that is pending.
 This maxim is applicable to a party who seeks an equitable relief .


Recognition Law In Pakistan And India 



Under section 19A of contract act , 1872 if a contract becomes voidable and the party who entered into the contract voids the contract, he has return the benefits of the contract.

Section 35 of TOPA embodies this principle of election.

Secftion 51 and 54 of the TOPA

In Order 8 rule 6th of the c.p.c, the doctrine of set off is recognized.



Concluding Remarks 



To conclude i would say that the plaintiff who seeks equity from the court of equity ; shall be entitled to it only when he give the defendant his equitable right.