UNIT 4

DOCTRINES OF EQUITY

Equity refers to a set of legal principles that supplement and, in some cases, override the rules of common law. Equity developed to address the rigidity and inadequacies of common law, providing remedies and justice in situations where the strict application of common law would result in unfair outcomes. The doctrines of equity are grounded in principles of fairness, justice, and conscience.

MAXIMS OF EQUITY

Equity operates on certain foundational principles known as maxims, which include:

1. Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy: this happens if a legal wrong occurs, equity ensures a remedy exists.
2. Equity follows the law: this is where equity respects established legal rules unless they lead to unjust outcomes.
3. He who seeks equity must do equity: this is where a party seeking equitable relief must act fairly.
4. He who comes to equity must come with clean hands: this is where a party must be free of wrongdoing in the matter at hand to seek equitable relief.
5. Delay defeats equity: this is where unreasonable delay in seeking equitable relief can bar a claim.
6. Equity looks to the intent rather than the form: this is where equity considers the intention behind actions rather than their strict legal form.

EQUITABLE REMEDIES

Equity provides various remedies, including:

1. Injunctions: this is where the court orders compelling a party to do or refrain from doing a specific act. See the case of Ojukwu v. Governor of Lagos State (1986) 3 NWLR (Pt. 26) 39 where the court illustrates the application of injunctions as an equitable remedy to prevent the eviction of a tenant without due process.
2. Specific performance: this are court orders requiring a party to perform their obligations under a contract.
3. Rescission: this happens by canceling a contract and restoring the parties to their pre-contractual positions.
4. Rectification: this happens by correcting mistakes in written contracts to reflect the true intentions of the parties.
5. Equitable estoppel: this happens by preventing a party from asserting rights or facts that are contrary to their previous actions or statements.

CONFLICTS BETWEEN COMMON LAW AND EQUITY

Conflicts between common law and equity arise when the principles or remedies provided by equity differ from those of common law. Historically, these conflicts were significant, leading to a complex interplay between the two systems.

RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS

The Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 in England, which influenced Nigerian law, unified the administration of common law and equity. Under these acts, equity prevails in cases of conflict. This principle was adopted into Nigerian law, ensuring that equitable principles override common law where there is a direct conflict. See section 236 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 which provides for the establishment of High Courts with the power to administer both law and equity.

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS

Judicial Precedent refers to the practice of courts following the decisions of higher courts in similar cases. This system, also known as stare decisis, ensures consistency and predictability in the law. See the case of Adesokan v. Adetunji (1994) 5 NWLR (Pt. 346) 540 where the court exemplifies the application of judicial precedent, where lower courts followed the decision of the Supreme Court.

HIERARCHY OF COURTS

In Nigeria, the hierarchy of courts determines the binding nature of precedents:

1. Supreme court: this is the highest court in Nigeria, whose decisions are binding on all other courts.
2. Court of appeal: the decisions of this court are binding on the Federal High Court, State High Courts, and lower courts.
3. Federal and state high courts: the decisions are binding on lower courts within their jurisdictions.

DISADVANTAGES OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENT

1. Rigidity: this is where the strict adherence to precedents can lead to inflexibility and an inability to adapt to new circumstances.
2. Complexity: this is where the large volume of case law can make it difficult to identify relevant precedents.
3. Slow development: Legal change through judicial precedent is slow and can lag behind societal changes.
4. Dependence on past decisions: this is where precedent-based decisions may perpetuate outdated or unjust rulings.

SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION

Subordinate Legislation, also known as delegated legislation, refers to laws made by an individual or body other than the legislature, under powers given to them by an Act of Parliament. This includes regulations, rules, orders, and by-laws. See section 4 of the Interpretation Act which provides the framework for the creation and interpretation of subordinate legislation in Nigeria.

TYPES OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION

1. Statutory instruments: these are detailed rules and regulations made by government ministers under the authority of an Act of Parliament.
2. By-laws: these are local laws made by local authorities or corporations to regulate matters within their jurisdiction.
3. Orders in council: these are laws made by the executive (President or Governor) with the advice of the Privy Council, often used in emergencies.

ADVANTAGES OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION

1. Flexibility: it allows for quick and adaptable law-making to address specific issues.
2. Expertise: it enables technical and specialized matters to be regulated by experts in the relevant fields.
3. Efficiency: it reduces the legislative burden on Parliament, allowing for more efficient law-making.

DISADVANTAGES OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION

1. Lack of accountability: this is where delegated authorities may not be as accountable as the primary legislature. See the case of DPP v. Chike Obi (1961) All NLR 186 where the court highlights issues of accountability and limits of subordinate legislation in the context of public order regulations.
2. Overuse: this is where excessive reliance on subordinate legislation can undermine the authority of Parliament.
3. Complexity and volume: this is where the sheer volume of subordinate legislation can lead to complexity and difficulties in compliance.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, understanding the doctrines of equity, conflicts between common law and equity, judicial precedents, and subordinate legislation is crucial for navigating the Nigerian legal system. These principles and practices ensure that the law remains fair, consistent, and adaptable to changing circumstances.