Table of contentsIntroductionDevelopment of the concept of equityDevelopment of modern equityFlexibility in equity theoryFeminism in equityRelevant cases on the objectives of developmentConclusionIntroduction In the English common law system, equity is the principle that governs the legal system. Equity in general is nothing more than a set of basic rules or legal principles and maxims that possess the power and legitimacy to override the law in question. It is this system which gave the civil judicial system all its components and extensions. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essayThe legal system of civil law essentially arises from equity. It is rather believed and proven beyond dispute that the principle of equity as a whole lessens the gravity of the common law system and overshadows it. This allows courts to apply caution and relate equity in unity with the natural law system. In reality, contemporary fairness is limited by a procedural and material system. English legal critiques rely on the technological characteristics of equity. In the case of historical criticism, critics argue that fairness lacked the rule suggested at the initial stage. The Lord Chancellor has rarely adjudicated on the main features of equity according to his principles. Various critics argue that equity should be flexible in nature. This article attempts to explore the theory of flexibility in the principle of fairness. At the same time, this article attempts to explore the effect of growth and development on the principle of equity in its modern aspect. Development of the concept of equity This court order granted him the written privilege of readmission to his own territory and recognized this privilege in the defense of the violation of his property right to his land. In 1253, to prevent judges from discovering new writs, the legislature declared that the power to relate to writs would then be transferred to judges with only one writ at a time, under a writ of privilege recognized as a scheme . of act. Due to the lack of legal remedy, the plaintiff's only alternative might be to plead with the king. So, following this, the people began to plead with the king for a reprieve from the unjust decisions of the courts, and as the community of petitioners quickly grew, the king therefore entrusted the work of adjudicating these appeals to the Lord Chancellor. As the chancellors of the premature stage lacked formal legal advice and observed little precedent, their conclusions were again and again very diverse. Around 1529 or so, a lawyer named Sir Thomas More was chosen for the position of Chancellor which marked the beginning of an innovative era. The question asked above all concerned its value and the certainty it possessed. While on one side a chancellor may have a long foot and the other a short foot, while in the other case the third may have another different measurement. The problem would be that all of this could be seen as a similar thing in a chancellor's conscience. With the development of equity law came increasing conflict and rivalry with common law principles. Disputing parties may engage in litigation shopping and seek an equitable restraint that would prohibit the enforcement of common law orders. The punishment imposed for not obeying the equitable "common injunction" and enforcement options given by the judgment of the common courts amounted to aprison sentence. Sir Edward Coke, who happened to be the Chief Justice of the King's Bench, initiated the system in which writs of habeas corpus began to be issued, requiring that offenders who were imprisoned for contempt of chancery orders would be released. This persisting difficulty reached a higher threshold in the case of the Earl of Oxford (1615) where the decision given by Chief Justice Coke was wrongly obtained. by commission of fraud. Lord Ellesmere, who was Lord Chancellor, passed a related injunction from the Court of Chancery which expressly imposed a ban on the application of the common law order. The two conflicting courts found themselves stuck in an impasse and subsequently the case was referred to Sir Francis Bacon, who happened to be the Attorney General. Sir Francis Bacon sought the authority of King James I and under that authority he argued that the common injunction could be granted and he also concluded that in the event of a conflict between common law and equity, that would it remain in existence is equity. Development of Modern Equity After 1473, the legal system witnessed a development of the Chancery system where the rights of parties were determined by the courts based on its own decrees and actions. Gradually, problems began to arise with the different modes of action of the chancery system and based on situations in which decisions directly conflicted with the system in force under common law. The process before the Court was not related to the issuance of writs per se but was concerned with the presentation of a petition which was subject to the requirement that the complaint which constitutes the subpoena be considered, but at the same time, there should be sufficient margin of prevention to prevent any action under common law and at the same time, prevent the issuance of any type of injunction. Thomas Moore defended the proposition that injunctions or any type of restraint should not be issued in case the judges who occupy the seats of common law courts come to terms with the harsh reality of the system, but at the same time, if they fail to agree and jointly decide on a single issue in a situation where existing systems were intended to collide and compete. In 1617 the Chief Justice of the King's Bench was Sir Edward Coke. The chief justice filed a complaint with the then king, James I, who asserted the rights of the chancellor, which ultimately gave rise to equitable jurisdiction. Well-established principles were then developed by successful chancellors. The most notable figures in this development were Lord Nottingham, commonly known as the Father, Lord Hardwicke, who happened to be the developer of the principles that were established, and Lord Eldon, known as the Consolidator. There was massive discontent in the Chancellery. The most attributable cause of this discontent in the Chancellery was that there was a buffer increase in the workload and the administration proved to be very inefficient. This inefficiency is linked to the pricing structure. This entire exhaustive list of causes has caused discontent in the Chancellery. In order to resolve this dispute, a greater number of appointments regarding judges were made and a harmonious situation was sought. Remedies which have been equated with the harmonious construction between the provisions of common law and equity have facilitated this regard. The resulting legislations in this regard were the Common Law Procedure Act of 1854 and the Chancery Law Amendment Act of 1858. It was finally felt that this moment had been reached and immediately required further reforms. is asystem opposed to or sometimes complementary to the common law legal system. Whenever the law is strict, the equity provisions remain flexible on that particular point. This principle argues in favor of the discretionary power of the court of judges depending instead solely on the rules and the law. This principle provides for justice rather than those that establish mere rights of the parties. In feminist jurisprudence, the most profound law affirms that the law of equity advocates justice towards women by applying the rule of flexibility. However, many argue that adequate flexibility in terms of fairness is an imaginary thing. Lord Denning advocates the need for a new fairness. It asserts that established law can be changed for obvious and valid reasons and to meet the needs of society. After 50 years of this approach, many modifications have been made based on the needs of society. Lord Denning's statement is considered one of the most modern approaches to the concept of fairness. Equity Feminism Equity feminism and gender feminism are the two classifications of feminism whose definition was first proposed by the eminent scholar Christina Hoff Sommers in her book "Who Stole Feminism ? » She then described equity feminism as possessing the ideological goal of ensuring equal and legitimate rights conferred by law on men and women. She then defined feminism in the genre as possessing the intention to combat the challenges posed. sexism and social structures of patriarchy that are addressed in daily practice associated with society and cultural diversity. Sommers herself very strongly defends her point of view which she prefers to call feminism in equity and at the same time she continues to constantly criticize her concept of what continues to be feminism in gender. Sommers gives a description of equity feminism as an ideology that has its roots deeply rooted in the essence of classical aspects of liberalism and has the specific goal of achieving complete equality with respect to the civil and equal rights of women. Experimental psychologist Steven Pinker exhaustively expands on what Sommers said. he continues to say that equity feminism is nothing more than a simple moral doctrine whose fundamental impulse is to treat men and women equally. it makes absolutely no commitments that require and take into account thorny and open questions, of an empirical nature, which exist either in psychology or in biology. According to the researcher's opinion, after analyzing all aspects of the existing law and different perspectives of equity, it can be said that to have a real reform in the field of feminism, equity can be fully defended. Regarding the different dimensions of feminism, various scholars provide evidence of significant restructuring associated with the construction and deconstruction of law. Of course, there are some exceptions to this feasible option, as shown in Wong's essay titles "Property Rights for Home Sharers: Equity versus Legislative Framework." Another scientific work that highlights the underlying exceptions is given in Fehlberg's study on sexually transmitted debt. Relevant cases on development objectives Williams and Glyn's Bank v. Boland are an important case in this discussion. This is an important aspect in changing the mortgage industry. In this case, for the first time, lenders would have considered a housewife. But the court of appeal extended the protection offered to Ms. Boland. At the end of the 20th century,”.