Post on 28-Oct-2014
EQUITY AND TRUSTS
MAXIMS OF EQUITY
(Kaedah-Kaedah Ekuiti)
EQUITY ACTS IN PERSONAM• Personal order against the defendant;• Equity enforces its powers against persons in its
jurisdiction regardless whether it relates to a property which is situated abroad;
• Penn v. Lord Baltimore (1750);• Webb v. Webb [1994];• Chellaram v. Chellaram [1985];• Re Valibhoy Decd (1961);
EQUITY FOLLOWS THE LAW
• Equity may not depart from statute law, nor does it refuse to follow common law rules;
• Equity does not destroy but fulfils the law;
• Eq. comes in when law too technical to redress a legal wrong;
• Punca Klasik Sdn. Bhd. v. Abdul Aziz Bin Abd. Hamid & Ors [1994];
EQUITY IS EQUALITY
• Equality – concurrent entitlement to identical interest and no express provision otherwise;
• Not necessarily mean equal shares but proportionate equality;
• Lau Choong Choo [1980];
• Tai Kwong Goldsmiths [1995];
EQUITY WILL NOT SUFFER A WRONG TO BE WITHOUT A REMEDY
• means : equity will ensure protection for a right which due to some technical defects is not enforceable at law;
•Plaintiff’s right must be suitable for enforcement by the court;
•Haji Osman (1952); MIMB [1992];
Eg. - Quia Timet Injunction;
- Trust;Settlor TP Trustee (Legal Owner)
Beneficiary (Eq. Owner)
HE WHO SEEKS EQUITY MUST DO EQUITY
• Means : Plaintiff who seeks equitable relief must be prepared to act fairly towards defendant
• Davis v. Duke of Marlborough (1819) : “… the principle of this court is not to give relief to those who will not do equity …”;
• Chappel v. Times newspaper [1975];• Solle v. Butcher [1950];• Boo Kok Ngeak & Anor [1998]
HE WHO COMES TO EQUITY MUST COME WITH CLEAN HANDS
• Similar : seeks equity do equity;• Difference ??;• NO – element of dishonesty on the
part of the plaintiff with regard to his previous conduct;
• Argyll (Duchess) v. Argyll (Duke) [1967];
• Chettiar v. Chettiar [1962];• Suntoso Jacob v. Kong Miao Ming
[1986];
WHERE THE EQUITIES ARE EQUAL THE LAW PREVAILS
• Twp persons, competing rights to the same item of property, A, both legal and equitable right, B equitable right only , A prevail;
• Langan v. Lee Cheng Keat;
WHERE THE EQUITIES ARE EQUAL THE FIRST IN TIME PREVAILS
• UMBC Corp. Bhd. (1976);
• Vallipurram Sivaguru (1937);
• Tee Say Poh (1939).
EQUITY REGARDS THAT AS DONE WHICH OUGHT TO BE DONE
• Where there is a specifically enforceable obligation, equity regards the arties as already in the position which they ought to be in;
• Walsh v. Lonsdale (1882);
• HL Bannerji [1983];
• Tee Say Poh (1939);
EQUITY LOOKS TO INTENT RATHER THE FORM
• Equity looks to the substance rather than the form;
• Hj Osman Bin Abu Bakar(1952);
EQUITY DOES NOT ALLOW A STATUTE TO BE USED AS AN
INSTRUMENT OF FRAUD
• Sia Siew Hong & Ors. V. Lim Gim Chian & Anor [1995] 3 MLJ 14
DELAY DEFEATS EQUITY
• Equity will not assist a Plaintiff who has failed to assert his rights within a reasonable time;
• Nelson v. Rye [1996];
• Haji Abdullah v. Abdul Majid [1949];