Equity XXII
10)
He who seeks equity must do equity. As per the maxim, an applicant or a
litigant who is relying on equity must have acted equitably himself or herself
before he or she can petition a court of equity to intervene on his or her
behalf. If the applicant’s or litigant’s actions are tainted with fraud or
malice than a court of equity certainly would not intervene on his or her
behalf.
Whether
a court of equity chooses to intervene or otherwise is entirely at the
discretion of the court and a court of equity will be reluctant to intervene or
will be hesitant to intervene if it finds that the actions of the applicant or
the litigant is tainted with fraud and malice.
In
Haywood v Cope (1858), it was decided that, as per Lord Romilly MR, - the
discretion of the Court must be exercised according to fixed and settled rules;
you cannot exercise a discretion by merely considering what, as between the
parties, would be fair to be done; what one person may consider fair, another
person may consider very unfair; you must have some settled rule and principle
upon which to determine how that discretion is to be exercised.
According
to the rules and established principles (equitable maxims), mentioned above, a
court of equity will only be prepared to intervene if they find that the
applicant or the litigant has acted equitably himself or herself.
Copyright
© 2019 by Dyarne Jessica Ward
Comments
Post a Comment