The legal environment of business pdf download

It does not automatically set a binding precedent and such a statement is referred to as obiter dictum; generally they are of persuasive authority only. Aggrieved parties, who felt that they were being denied justice due to the absence of an enabling statute or precedent, began sending their petitions directly to the King, who referred such requests to another royal court, known as the Chancery.

The Chancery was headed by a Chancellor who possessed power to settle disputes and order equitable remediesaccording to his conscience. The decisions of the Chancellor were made without regard for the common law, and they gradually became the basis of the law of equity. This came in several forms, such as,specific performance, by which a judge could order a party to perform a specific act.

There are three types of notices. Actual notice would exist for example where a buyer had actual or express notice of a prior interest, at the time of purchase, or before a purchase was completed. Constructive notice was defined by Salden J in Williamson v Brown to exist where a purchaser had prior knowledge of any fact sufficient to put him on inquiry as to the existence of a right or title in conflict with that which he was about to purchase.

Such a purchaser was presumed to have made the inquiry and to have ascertained the extent of such prior right or to have been guilty of a degree of negligence equally fatal to his claim.

The rule that a prior interest in land should always be put into consideration was illustrated in U. Cv Lutaaya where Karokora JSC held thus "A proprietor takes land subject to the interests of any tenant in the land in possession even if he or she had no actual notice of the tenant". Imputed notice — where notice is neither actual nor constructive it may be imputed to the buyer through actual notice to the agent.

It is well established in agency law that notice to an agent is taken as having knowledge of whatever the agent gets to know. The Equitable Doctrine of Election The doctrine of election means that a person cannot claim benefits and reject burdens under the same instrument.

Thus in Codrington v Codringtonper Lord Cairns a person cannot accept a benefit under a deed or will without the same time conforming to all its provisions. Equitable Conversion — Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, a Court of Equity can order the completion of a sale when the death of a seller occurs between the signing of the sale agreement and the date of the actual sale.

In such a case, a judge will convert the title to the purchaser. This is in fulfillment of the time-honored Maxim that "Equity looks upon that as done which ought to have been done. Under this doctrine, the needs and contributions of each spouse are considered when property is divided between them.

Equitable Estoppel — Under the doctrine of equitable estoppels, a Court of Equity could prevent, or stop a person from claiming a legal right, out of fairness to the opposing party. Equitable Lien — A lien is an interest in property given to a creditor to secure the satisfaction of a debt. An equitable lien may arise from a written contract if the contract shows an intention to charge a party's property with a debt or obligation.

An equitable lien may also be declared by a judge in order to fairly secure the rights of a party to a contract. Equitable Recoupment — The doctrine of equitable recoupment prevents a party from collecting the full amount of a debt if she or he is holding something that belongs to the debtor. It is usually invoked only as a defense to mitigate the amount a defendant owes to a plaintiff.

Equity of Redemption — Equity of redemption is the right of a homeowner with a mortgage a mortgagor to reclaim the property after it has been forfeited.

Redemption can be accomplished by paying the entire amount of the debt, interest, and court costs of the foreclosing lender. With equity of redemption, a mortgagor has a specified period of time after default and before fore-closure, in which to reclaim the property Maxims of Equity Over the years Equity developed its own hackneyed principles, such as the following: Where equity and the law conflict, equity prevail — This maxim means that where rules of law and equity are at variance on some particular point, the rules of equity ought to prevail.

Where the equities are the same, the law must prevail prevails — The law should be used to determine the outcome of a controversy in which the merits of both sides are equal. Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy — Equitable relief will be awarded, when there is a right to a relief, and there is no relief available at law.

Equity regards substance rather than form — This maxim implies that a Court of Equity is more concerned with fairness and justice rather than with mere legal technicalities. Equity follows the law — This rule of equity means that, a Court of Equity will neither depart from statutory law nor refuse to follow common law rules except in exceptional cases.

For example, in a land dispute, a Court of Equity will respect and not override the legal interest if shown evidence of valid land registration documents. Equity imputes an intention to fulfill an obligation — Where a party is obliged to perform an act and that party did some other act which could be regarded as a performance of it, then it will be so regarded by a Court of Equity.

The text writers give an example of a debtor leaving a legacy to his creditor equal or greater to his obligation. A Court of Equity will regard such a gift as performance of the obligation to the creditor.

Thus the creditor will not be permitted to claim both the legacy and payment of the debt. Equity regards as done which ought to be done — This maxim means that where a contract is specifically enforceable, a Court of Equity will regard the promisor as having done what he has promised to do. Equity acts in personam — This rule of equity implies that, a Court of Equity has jurisdiction over a party personally.

The personal nature of this jurisdiction is illustrated by the fact that failure to comply with the order such as specific performance or an injunction is a contempt of court punishable by imprisonment. Delay defeats equity — This rule of equity means that, a Court of Equity will assist a vigilant and not an indolent party.

This is the primary foundation for the doctrine of larches and acquiescence where a party who slept on his rights cannot obtain equitable relief. Anytime a party suffers some wrong or injury, that party must act immediately or timeously.

When you relax on your rights a court of fairness cannot assist you right a wrong that you could have prevented if you had been vigilant. Equity does not require an idle gesture — This rule of equity means that, a party cannot compel a Court of Equity to undertake a vain thing or issue empty orders.

For example, It would be an idle gesture for a Court of Equity to grant rectification of a contract and then to deny to a prevailing party the opportunity to perform it as modified. Equity delights to do justice and not by halves — This maxim means that, where a Court of Equity is presented with a good claim to equitable relief, and in the same breath it is clear that a party has also sustained monetary costs, a Court of Equity has jurisdiction to as well give the injured party, legal reliefs like monetary damages.

A Court of Equity will therefore not stop at granting only an equitable relief, but will proceed to give a complete raft of remedies Equity will not allow a statute to be used as a cloak for fraud — This maxim means that, a Court of Equity will prevent a party from relying upon an absence of a statutory formality, if to do so would be unconscionable and unfair. This can occur in secret trusts and also constructive trusts and so on.

To apply a piece of legislation,however, a judge must determine its meaning, and to achieve do, judges applied one of three rules - the literal, golden, or mischief rule.

The literal rule Under this rule, the judge considers what the statute actually says rather than what it might mean. The golden rule This rule is applied in circumstances where applying the literal rule will probably lead to an absurd result. Except that the court is not at liberty to ignore, or replace, statutory provisions merely on the basis that it considers them absurd.

The mischief rule When there is ambiguity in a statute, a court of law may go beyond the actual wording of a statute to consider the problem or mischief that the statute was enacted to remedy. The common law was built up over centuries, through the application of judicial precedent. Equity developed rules of fairness, at the courts of chancery, to deal with rigidities of the common law.

The judiciary is required to interpret statutes made by the legislature. To do this, judges may resort to the literal, golden or mischief rule. To the extent the damages relator seeks are based on a breach of his employment agreement, he is not entitled to recover because his position was at-will. Why did Ellis, the relator, believe that his employment was not at will but based on an employment contract? What was Ellis seeking as damages in this lawsuit?

According to the court, was Ellis an at-will employee? What reasons did the court give to support its conclusion? Judicial Deference. Conley had been a coal miner, but he had also been a longtime smoker. No evidence was presented to support this conclusion, however. The administrative law judge awarded benefits. On appeal, should a court defer to this decision? National Mines Corp. Miranda v. Miranda was taken to a Phoenix, Arizona, police station and questioned by two officers.

Two hours later, the officers emerged from the interrogation room with a written confession signed by Miranda. The confession was admitted into evidence at his trial, and Miranda was convicted and sentenced to prison for twenty to thirty years. Miranda appealed, claiming that he had not been informed of his constitutional rights. At the outset, if a person in custody is to be subjected to interrogation, he must first be informed in clear and unequivocal terms that he has the right to remain silent.

The warning of the right to remain silent must be accompanied by the explanation that anything said can and will be used against the individual in court. This warning is needed in order to make him aware not only of the privilege, but also of the consequences of forgoing it. Therefore the right to have counsel present at the interrogation is indispensable to the protection of the Fifth Amendment privilege under the system we delineate today.

In order fully to apprise a person interrogated of the extent of his rights under this system then, it is necessary to warn him not only that he has the right to consult with an attorney, but also that if he is indigent [without funds] a lawyer will be appointed to represent him.

The United States Supreme Court held that Miranda could not be convicted of the crime on the basis of his confession because his confession was inadmissible as evidence. For any statement made by a defendant to be admissible, the defendant must be informed of certain constitutional rights prior to police interrogation.

If the accused waives his or her rights to remain silent and to have counsel present, the government must demonstrate that the waiver was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. Despite considerable criticism and later attempts to overrule the Miranda decision through legislation, the requirements stated in this case continue to provide the benchmark by which criminal procedures are judged today.

The right to remain silent has long been a legal hallmark in Great Britain as well as in the United States. But if you do not mention now something which you later use in your defense, the court may decide that your failure to mention it now strengthens the case against you. A record will be made of everything you say, and it may be given in evidence if you are brought to trial. Should U. How can a U.

Rent The Legal Environment of Business 9th edition today, or search our site for other textbooks by Frank B. Every textbook comes with a day 'Any Reason' guarantee.