279:
146:
28:
205:, Master (1604–1624) considered that, in the light of the 1571 Act, he was able to lease the land to John Smith and allowed him into occupation as such. Warren brought an action of ejection against Smith, but his lease expired before it was heard by court. Warren asked the question to be decided anyway.
353:
as mercy and justice be the true supports of our Royal Throne; and it properly belongeth to our princely office to take care and provide that our subjects have equal and indifferent justice ministered to them; and that when their case deserveth to be relieved in course of equity by suit in our Court
268:
out of the Court of
Chancery prohibiting the enforcement of the common law order, and granting the Earl of Oxford and his tenants quiet enjoyment of the land, in other words meaning that the statute did not void the initial transaction of the land. It stayed all common lawsuits against the Earl. He
233:
overturned the jury and held the earlier land transfer was void, caught by the
Ecclesiastical Leases Act 1571. The monarch was 'the fountain of justice and common right' and could not be exempted from a statute aimed to maintain the advancement of learning. Therefore, Gooch, acting for the college
218:
The Jury held that Smith took possession unlawfully (i.e. through the more recent lease by Gooch on behalf of the
College) the long-term Elizabethan sale in apparent defiance of the Act was good, and in the jury's view was as good a title as almost any. The first instance verdict was therefore
273:
28:30, saying he "that builds a House ought to dwell in it; and he that plants a
Vineyard ought to gather the Grapes thereof." He remarked that common law judges themselves ‘play the Chancellors Parts’ in taking the equitable construction of statutes to be law properly speaking. The Chancery,
189:
merchant. It was generally thought among those preparing and signing these conveyancing deeds that the transfer to the Queen or transfer from the Queen would amount to an unwritten exception, allowing for new unimpeachable title (ownership). Spinola thought this, and so did
307:, law and equity are distinct, both in their courts, their judges, and the rules of justice; and yet they both aim at one and the same end, which is to do right; as Justice and Mercy differ in their effects and operations, yet both join in the manifestation of God's glory.
149:
Henry de Vere believed he should have title to certain land rather than
Magdalene College, Cambridge. Chancery – the courts in equity – agreed; however, this provoked a disagreement between the courts, resolved by the Monarch advised by the Attorneys
110:
The Lord
Chancellor held: "The Cause why there is Chancery is, for that Mens Actions are so divers and infinite, that it is impossible to make any general Law which may aptly meet with every particular Act, and not fail in some Circumstances."
503:
324:
The Cause why there is
Chancery is, for that Mens Actions are so divers and infinite, That it is impossible to make any general Law which may aptly meet with every particular Act, and not fail in some Circumstances.
293:
The Office of the
Chancellor is to correct Men’s consciences for Frauds, Breach of Trusts, Wrongs and oppressions, of what Nature soever they be, and to soften and mollify the Extremity of the Law, which is called
358:
The word 'well' in the King's determination meant not just 'good' but also 'superior'. The King decreed on the advice of the
Attorneys General that if there was a conflict between the common law and
354:
of
Chancery, they should not be abandoned and exposed to perish under the rigor and extremity of our laws, we ... do approve, ratifie and confirm, as well the practice of our Court of Chancery.
125:
The King decreed on the advice of the Attorneys General that if there was a conflict between the common law and equity, equity would prevail. Equity's primacy in England was later enshrined in the
234:
had validly leased the property to Smith. This caught sub-tenants too (sub-lessees): Warren could not eject (nor be found to have any rights against) Smith under his fresh lease from the college.
158:, provided that conveyances of estates by the masters, fellows, or any college dean to anyone for anything other than a term of 21 years, or three lives, ‘shall be utterly void’.
319:
In this Case there is no Opposition to the Judgment; neither will the Truth or justice of the Judgment be examined in this Court, not any Circumstance depending thereupon.
346:
282:
261:
408:
227:
314:, the Chancellor will frustrate and set it aside, not for any error or Defect in the Judgment, but for the hard Conscience of the Party.
238:
242:
249:. Gooch and Smith refused to answer the bill and refused to appear, asserting that it was void. The Chancery Court committed them to
333:
As a result of Lord Ellesmere's decision, the two courts became locked in a stalemate. Lord Ellesmere effectively appealed to King
388:
311:
536:
155:
541:
166:
40:
349:. Both recommended a judgment in Lord Ellesmere's favour, which King James I approved. He issued a declaration saying:
278:
439:
118:) in the common law, a principle regularly asserted in the courts of appeal i.e. "equity follows the law", one of the
546:
418:
145:
338:
556:
398:
170:
526:
198:, who bought the land in 1580 and built 130 houses. John Warren leased a house through intermediaries.
114:
The judgment stresses that the legal position for chancery (equity) is tempered to dealing with voids (
551:
403:
371:
134:
531:
413:
383:
495:
433:
246:
178:
393:
367:
296:
182:
130:
119:
36:
363:
286:
126:
27:
334:
245:(b. 1593) who was a minor. He and another tenant, Thomas Wood, brought the case in the
202:
195:
191:
274:
however, was not like a Court of Appeal. Instead, the Chancery had a unique position.
520:
428:
423:
342:
122:
which taken together impose many limits on the eligibility of cases and applicants.
76:
362:, the latter would prevail. Equity's primacy in England was later enshrined in the
359:
250:
100:
374:(although emphatically not the systems themselves) into one unified court system.
137:(although emphatically not the systems themselves) into one unified court system.
270:
162:
265:
115:
104:
237:
However, in 1604, the alleged owner of the large parcels of land in question
230:
99:(1615) 21 ER 485 is a foundational case for the common law world, that held
481:
An historical sketch of the equitable jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery
32:
461:
4 Henry 4 c. 22 also declares judgments in the King’s courts are final.
329:
Royal and Attorneys General determination of priority of law and equity
174:
277:
186:
144:
310:… when a Judgment is obtained by Oppression, Wrong and a
219:sitting tenant Warren was entitled to eject Smith.
82:
72:
64:
56:
48:
20:
366:in 1873 and 1875, which also served to fuse the
304:
129:in 1873 and 1875, which also served to fuse the
103:(equitable principle) takes precedence over the
351:
276:
269:began his judgment by referencing the Bible,
43:, believed had cheated them out of their land
8:
26:
17:
339:Attorney General for the Prince of Wales
241:had died, succeeded by his son and heir
454:
500:A selection of leading cases in equity
347:Attorney General for England and Wales
283:Thomas Egerton, 1st Viscount Brackley
181:. The queen then granted the land to
7:
509:Charles Mitchell and Paul Mitchell,
409:Possession is nine-tenths of the law
239:Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford
68:(1615) 1 Ch Rep 1, (1615) 21 ER 485
14:
337:, who referred the matter to the
389:Unconscionability in English law
156:Ecclesiastical Leases Act 1571
1:
167:Magdalene College, Cambridge
165:, Master and the Fellows of
41:Magdalene College, Cambridge
440:Void and Voidable Contracts
573:
419:Formalities in English law
169:sold some of its land (at
87:
25:
511:Landmark Cases in Equity
399:Estoppel in English law
253:for contempt of court.
506:) vol 2, part 1, 78–79
356:
326:
303:And for the judgment,
290:
151:
537:English land case law
281:
222:
161:Not mindful of this,
148:
96:Earl of Oxford's case
21:Earl of Oxford’s case
404:Proprietary estoppel
171:St Botolph's Aldgate
542:1615 in English law
470:Kerly (1890) p.114
414:Declaratory relief
384:English trusts law
291:
289:who gave judgment.
264:, issued a common
152:
547:1610s in case law
434:Statute of Frauds
262:Lord Ellesmere LC
247:Court of Chancery
179:Queen Elizabeth I
92:
91:
52:Court of Chancery
564:
484:
477:
471:
468:
462:
459:
394:English land law
368:courts of equity
306:
183:Benedict Spinola
131:courts of equity
120:maxims of equity
37:Benedict Spinola
30:
18:
572:
571:
567:
566:
565:
563:
562:
561:
517:
516:
492:
487:
478:
474:
469:
465:
460:
456:
452:
380:
364:Judicature Acts
331:
312:hard Conscience
287:Lord Chancellor
259:
225:
216:
211:
154:A statute, the
143:
127:Judicature Acts
44:
12:
11:
5:
570:
568:
560:
559:
557:James VI and I
554:
549:
544:
539:
534:
529:
519:
518:
515:
514:
507:
491:
488:
486:
485:
472:
463:
453:
451:
448:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
442:
437:
431:
426:
416:
411:
406:
401:
391:
386:
379:
376:
330:
327:
258:
255:
224:
221:
215:
212:
210:
207:
203:Barnabas Gooch
196:Earl of Oxford
192:Edward de Vere
142:
139:
90:
89:
85:
84:
80:
79:
74:
70:
69:
66:
62:
61:
58:
54:
53:
50:
46:
45:
31:
23:
22:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
569:
558:
555:
553:
550:
548:
545:
543:
540:
538:
535:
533:
530:
528:
525:
524:
522:
512:
508:
505:
501:
497:
494:
493:
489:
482:
476:
473:
467:
464:
458:
455:
449:
441:
438:
435:
432:
430:
429:Feet of fines
427:
425:
424:Quia Emptores
422:
421:
420:
417:
415:
412:
410:
407:
405:
402:
400:
397:
396:
395:
392:
390:
387:
385:
382:
381:
377:
375:
373:
369:
365:
361:
355:
350:
348:
344:
343:Francis Bacon
340:
336:
328:
325:
322:
320:
317:
315:
313:
308:
301:
299:
298:
288:
284:
280:
275:
272:
267:
263:
256:
254:
252:
248:
244:
240:
235:
232:
229:
228:Chief Justice
220:
213:
208:
206:
204:
199:
197:
193:
188:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
164:
159:
157:
147:
140:
138:
136:
132:
128:
123:
121:
117:
112:
108:
106:
102:
98:
97:
86:
81:
78:
75:
71:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
42:
38:
34:
29:
24:
19:
16:
527:Equity (law)
510:
499:
480:
475:
466:
457:
357:
352:
332:
323:
321:
318:
316:
309:
302:
295:
292:
260:
251:Fleet Prison
236:
226:
223:King's Bench
217:
200:
160:
153:
124:
113:
109:
95:
94:
93:
15:
552:1615 in law
271:Deuteronomy
163:Roger Kelke
88:Equity, law
532:Common law
521:Categories
490:References
483:(1890) 114
372:common law
297:summum jus
266:injunction
135:common law
105:common law
73:Transcript
479:D Kerly,
77:CommonLII
496:FT White
378:See also
341:and Sir
285:was the
257:Chancery
209:Judgment
150:General.
83:Keywords
65:Citation
33:Gargoyle
370:and of
335:James I
305:&c.
187:Genoese
133:and of
116:lacunae
57:Decided
513:(2012)
436:(1677)
360:equity
345:, the
201:Then,
194:, the
175:London
101:equity
39:, who
450:Notes
243:Henry
177:) to
141:Facts
49:Court
504:1926
231:Coke
214:Jury
185:, a
60:1615
173:in
35:of
523::
498:,
300:.
107:.
502:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
