University:
University of California, Berkeley
Course:
Law 200.2 | Civil Procedure for LL.M.Students
Academic year:

2020
Views:

166

Pages:

1
Author:

Edgar Rowe

The difference between common law and equity comes down to who hears a case and passes judgment on it, as well as the type of action for which such judgment may call. Common law typically refers to laws based on precedence and the rulings of judges who hear a case in a courtroom. Equity, on the other hand, refers to laws that are similarly established by court rulings but deal with judgment and justice through equitable decisions. While proceedings regarding the two are somewhat similar today, in the past they were divided into two different courts. Common law is a structure used in countries of Anglo-Saxon origin, countries as the United Kingdom and the USA. Common is law is more based in jurisprudence than the written law itself, jurisprudence is the set of interpretations of the written laws. An example of common Law would be a case where people of the same marriage want to get married and they look for previous cases to support their idea where as also the opposition base uses their argument on previous cases. The equity law started to evolve when the common law became more consolidated and rigid, strict rules about the gathering of evidences started to create problems and injustices. Differences between common law and equity are the common law uses money as the only remedy where as equity seeks another juridical remedies or even monetary remedies. Common law uses previous cases to support and decide new cases and equity law is based on the written laws and decisions are made in equitable way. Common Law doesn’t recognise the existence the equity law and equity law recognises the common and tries to provide solutions.