Search

Skip to main content Accessibility help

Only show content I have access to (0)

Chapters (1)

Over 3 years (1)

From year:

To year:

Apply

Law (1)

Cambridge University Press (1)

1 results

4 - What Did the Makers of the Judicature Acts Understand by ‘Fusion’?
from Part I - Legal Systems and Legal Institutions
- By Michael Lobban
Edited by John C. P. Goldberg, Harvard Law School, Massachusetts, Henry E. Smith, Harvard Law School, Massachusetts, P. G. Turner, University of Cambridge
Book:

Equity and Law

Published online:

26 July 2019

Print publication:

01 August 2019, pp 70-96
- Chapter
- - Get access
    
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
    
    Log in Register
- Export citation
Summary

Apart from the fact that the meaning of “fusion” is debated today in relation to law and equity, its meaning was contested by the participants in the debates that led to the reforms which “fused” the courts of common law and of equity – and others – in England in 1875. The understandings of fusion among these people differed for various reasons. Where some lawyers thought equity inherently different to common law, fusion concerned the substance of the law. Some saw fusion as relating only to differing procedures used in courts of equity and courts of common law, while others again treated fusion as a necessary change of the legal profession: the specialisation and mutual ignorance by equity and common lawyers of one another had to be overcome. The legal reforms pursued to achieve these conflicting ends also changed, ultimately becoming reforms of the entire judicature not merely of law and equity.