Common Law and National Consumer Law
Chapter 1 1. Why did common law become so rigid and inflexible?
Answer: By the reign of henry II, the practice of sending the royal justice throughout the country “on circuit” began to result in fairly uniform body of law developing around the country- the common law. The judges were assisted in finding an agreement among them by keeping records known as plea rolls. They set out not only the facts of each case and judgement, but often the reasoning behind the judgement, in much the same way as the modern law reports does.
During the reign of henry II writs came into wide use. They were purchased from the king’s clerks of chancery and stated the complaint, ordering the name person either to right the wrong or to show the king’s justices why they should not. The issuing of new writs to cover new wrongs meant that the common law was fairly flexible at this time, because it could easily adapt to meet changing conditions. However the passing of the provisions of oxford in 1258 resulted in the common law losing much of its flexibility by providing, among other thing, that if the facts in issue did not fit the standard form of wit, the action could fail.
2. In what ways equity differs from common law?
Answer: the differences between common law and equity are:
Common law: a. Is a comprehensive system. b. Remedies are not discretionary. c. Common law rights are enforceable at any time subjected to the operation of a state or territory’s statute of limitations. d. Common la rights are valid against the whole world.
Equity:
a. Not a comprehensive system- for example, never had a criminal jurisdiction. b. Remedies are discretionary. c. Remedies must be applied for promptly or they may not be enforceable. d. Equitable rights are valid only against those persons specified by the court. e. It follows the common law, it will not override it. f. It acts only against the individual (i.e. in the personam), not property.
3. What are the main
Answer: By the reign of henry II, the practice of sending the royal justice throughout the country “on circuit” began to result in fairly uniform body of law developing around the country- the common law. The judges were assisted in finding an agreement among them by keeping records known as plea rolls. They set out not only the facts of each case and judgement, but often the reasoning behind the judgement, in much the same way as the modern law reports does.
During the reign of henry II writs came into wide use. They were purchased from the king’s clerks of chancery and stated the complaint, ordering the name person either to right the wrong or to show the king’s justices why they should not. The issuing of new writs to cover new wrongs meant that the common law was fairly flexible at this time, because it could easily adapt to meet changing conditions. However the passing of the provisions of oxford in 1258 resulted in the common law losing much of its flexibility by providing, among other thing, that if the facts in issue did not fit the standard form of wit, the action could fail.
2. In what ways equity differs from common law?
Answer: the differences between common law and equity are:
Common law: a. Is a comprehensive system. b. Remedies are not discretionary. c. Common law rights are enforceable at any time subjected to the operation of a state or territory’s statute of limitations. d. Common la rights are valid against the whole world.
Equity:
a. Not a comprehensive system- for example, never had a criminal jurisdiction. b. Remedies are discretionary. c. Remedies must be applied for promptly or they may not be enforceable. d. Equitable rights are valid only against those persons specified by the court. e. It follows the common law, it will not override it. f. It acts only against the individual (i.e. in the personam), not property.
3. What are the main