What is the difference between common law and equity?

The difference between common law and equity can be best explained in the context of California jurisprudence law. Common law is statutory law made by judges, which is based on prior court decisions. This established and develops the legal system, and is known as judicial precedent. Common law is applicable to all jurisdictions and is applicable to many legal issues which arise. Equity, on the other hand, is law originating from a court of equity, which is based on fairness and justice. Unlike common law, equity is discretionary, meaning it can be adapted to the particular case being heard. Equity may be applied when a law does not adequately address an issue, or if the existing law does not do justice to the parties involved. Unlike common law, which is based on precedence and established law, equity is based on fairness and justice. In California, the court may look to common law and equity when making a decision. Common law provides a base of established and interpretable law that must be adhered to. If a court finds the law to be inadequate or not adequately address a case, then equity may be called upon and a court will use its discretion to make a decision. Common law and equity are both important and are both used in California courts.

Related FAQs

What is the purpose of private law in jurisprudence law?
How does the study of jurisprudence law differ in different countries?
How have different interpretations of jurisprudence law shaped its development?
How does jurisprudence law affect the administration of justice?
What are the different methods of legal interpretation?
What is the role of the judge in jurisprudence law?
What is jurisprudence law?
What are some of the common arguments used in jurisprudence law?
What is the relationship between equity and jurisprudence law?
How does the justice system use jurisprudence law?

What is the difference between common law and equity?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts