That which ought to be done

To view this document in full, take a free trial of LexisLibrary and benefit from: Access to 20 million legal documents from over 1, Sources as part of our archive The ability to download court judgments within 30 minutes of their release New enactments available within 24 hours of publication on legislation.

Miss Mrs. Legal Categories. Discover LexisLibrary. For example, this maxim applies where a trustee holds legal title to a parcel of land for the benefit of another the beneficiary.

In this case, the law recognizes that the trustee holds legal title, which at common law is unfettered legal ownership. This means the trustee has all the rights of ownership including the rights to use, enjoyment, and disposal of the land. However, the trustee holds the land for the benefit of the beneficiary, thereby creating a trust. At law, a trust is an unexecuted use, a conveyancing device such that legal title is conveyed to the trustee to hold the land for the benefit of the beneficiary.

Equity cannot operate to change the legal title from the trustee to the beneficiary, so equity imposes obligations on the trustee to act for the sole benefit of the beneficiary, thereby protecting the equitable rights of the beneficiary in that land. This maxim deals with the defence of laches to equitable relief. Laches means unreasonable delay such that the granting of relief would produce inequitable results.

Laches is more than mere delay, and instead implies neglect to do what ought to have been done. Thus, the maxim means that a party who delays in enforcing rights will not be able to seek equitable relief. The equitable maxim that delay defeats equity is a general but not an absolute principle.

For instance, the defence of laches does not apply where the plaintiff failed to enforce his rights because he was not aware of them unless the concept of constructive knowledge applies. In this sense, the defence of acquiescence to equitable relief is related to the defence of laches. The defence of acquiescence applies to bar equitable relief where the plaintiff either affirmed or abandoned his right, thereby implying the plaintiff had knowledge of his right.

It should also be noted that the defence of laches and defence of acquiescence will not apply where the plaintiff does not in fact suffer any prejudice or change in position as a result of the delay itself. Furthermore, the maxim of delay defeats equity will not apply where the conduct of the defendant is such as to render the success of the defence to be inequitable. For example, the defendant does not herself come to equity with clean hands because the delay was caused by the fraud of the defendant.

Indeed, in considering the defence of laches , the courts of equity consider whether such a delay was excusable or justifiable. The subject and ought to change position to form questions. Ought she to call the police? Ought we to be more worried about the environment? The question form of ought to is not very common. It is very formal. We usually use should instead. We use ought to when talking about things which are desired or ideal:. They ought to have more parks in the city centre.

We ought to eat lots of fruit and vegetables every day. It can express regret:. We ought to have locked the gate. I often think that I ought to have studied medicine not pharmacy. I would be happier now if I had studied medicine. We can use ought to when we talk about what is likely or probable:. There ought to be some good films at the cinema this weekend. Ought to and should are similar in meaning.

Should is more common than ought to. Ought to is more formal than should :. There ought to be more street lights here. I really ought to walk my dog more. In speaking, we normally use should as a tag for clauses with ought to :. We ought not to have to pay for basic medicines, should we? Modality: introduction. Outsets and onsets! Ought to. What is desired or ideal. What is likely. Ought to or should? Spoken English:.

See also: Modality: introduction Tags. Popular searches 01 Collocation 02 Comparison: adjectives bigger , biggest , more interesting 03 Future: will and shall 04 Say or tell? Test your vocabulary with our fun image quizzes. Image credits. Word of the Day have a heart of gold. Blog Outsets and onsets! Read More. November 08, To top. Adjectives and adverbs Easily confused words Nouns, pronouns and determiners Prepositions and particles Using English Verbs Words, sentences and clauses.

Sign up for free and get access to exclusive content:. Free word lists and quizzes from Cambridge. Tools to create your own word lists and quizzes. Word lists shared by our community of dictionary fans.

Sign up now or Log in. Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English. Click on the arrows to change the translation direction. Follow us. Choose a dictionary. Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English. Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English. Grammar Thesaurus. Word Lists. Choose your language. Instead, equity looks at the form of the subject matter, rather than allowing the intention to dissolve in favour of caveats that work against common law and obstruct a proper outcome.

This was demonstrated through the words of Lord Romily Mr in Parkin v Thorold, who remarked that an agreement between a vendor and purchaser did not rest upon the limitations of time; and that, when charges against the vendor for specific performance altered the essence of the contract, it was equity that referred the parties to the form of the arrangement:.

While limited in scope, this maxim can be appreciated within property law matters, as it is a legal requirement under section 53 1 b of the Law of Property Act that any contracts for sale or occupancy must be written.

An example of this was in Bannister v Bannister , where the owner of a property conveyed a party rent free occupancy of the home for life before they tried to evict them; however, it was argued by the defendant that an oral contract existed, which defeated the act of statute when the respondent went back on their promise.

Relating to ambition and intention , the aim here is to hold to account the statements or actions by a party that are later required to be enforced, regardless of any reasonable changes in circumstance and when the court finds that no fulfilment has occurred, the obligation to do so will be levied through equity.

An example of this is Lechmere v Lady Lechmere ; in which, a Lord bound himself to purchase land for an agreed sum, that would then pass through death to his wife.

Upon his passing, it was discovered that he had failed to uphold his requirement during the lifetime of their marriage by purchasing other lands that now fell within the residue of his estate and required a successor in title other than his son. Through the application of this maxim, the court allowed the transfer to his wife for the amount agreed, whereupon his obligations were deemed satisfied, as was expressed within the judgment, which read:.

There are times in law where the misdeeds of others wind up obscuring the natural order of events, hence this equitable maxim is crucial to redressing the imbalance and putting matters where equity can reign. A fitting case example is Attorney-General for Hong Kong v Reid, where a senior crown prosecutor received bribes to obstruct the course of justice, while employed in a manner that bestowed fiduciary duties.

When it was discovered that those illegal payments had been invested in a number of properties, it was agreed that those homes were held on trust by the appellant for the benefit of the Crown; and while the rules of equity prevent a debtor to the injured party being a trustee for the monies received, the Court of Appeal allowed that conflict to stand in order for the outcome to find form and for natural remedy to occur.

The provider of a bribe cannot recover it because he committed a criminal offence when he paid the bribe. The false fiduciary who received the bribe in breach of duty must pay and account for the bribe to the person to whom that duty was owed.

Because some matters involve effects belonging to individuals that may have since moved abroad, the principle that equity acts against the person provides domestic courts with an ability to extend their reach without interruption of foreign laws.

This may come into play when a property owner or business person has entered into a contract binding them within the United Kingdom, but whose absence may permit avoidance of liability for remedy.