| Earl of Oxford’s case | |
|---|---|
| Citation(s) | (1615) 1 Ch Rep 1, (1615) 21 ER 485 |
| Keywords | |
| Equity, law | |
Earl of Oxford’s case (1615) 21 ER 485 is a foundational case for the common law world, that held equitable principle takes precedence over the common law.
Contents |
A judgment of Chief Justice Coke was allegedly obtained by fraud.
Lord Ellesmere LC issued a common injunction out of the Chancery prohibiting the enforcement of the common law order.
| “ | 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 sunimum jus.
And for the judgment, &c., 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 man-ifestation of God's glory. … when a Judgment is obtained by Oppression, Wrong and a hard Conscience, 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. |
” |
The two courts became locked in a stalemate. It was referred to AG Sir Francis Bacon. By authority of King James I, the common injunction was upheld and it was decreed 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 Judicature Acts of the 1870s, which also served to fuse the courts of equity and the common law (although emphatically not the systems themselves) into one unified court system.