Teaching SampleS

Below, you can view a screencast that I recorded for my Law of Trusts class. Unlike in the UK, Equitable Remedies is taught separately to the Law of Trusts. I decided to make this introductory screencast because I felt it could benefit my Equitable Remedies students who do not need to know trusts in-depth, but will be exposed to some concepts like the role of a trustee, and constructive trusts as a remedy. In addition, it is useful for my trusts students to look at at the beginning of the course and come back to as we progress.

For my Corporate Finance class, I have students compete in a stock simulator. This makes the course come alive and teaches them about the volatility of the stock mark. The first half of the course focuses on raising share capital, so having them participate in this game helps them understand the different regulations around raising capital and various types of share trading. It also gives them an insight into the stock market which I think is valuable for them as they will be working soon and may wish to have an investment portfolio. We look at the rankings week in class which encourages friendly competition. Students like to explain the changes in the economy that have impacted their portfolio which shows that they are taking the time to understand the various factors that can affect the stock market. They also learn about the risks of trading on the public marketing since the course covers both private and public companies.

For my Equitable Remedies class, I had students divide themselves into teams and choose a team name. Games were played in class, and students could score points for their team by participating in lectures. Students who scored individual points were named via email weekly, and their names were highlighted in yellow on the score sheet. I received positive feedback from the most active students, who, unsurprisingly, tended to score points most frequently, but some students complained to the course representative that they did not want to participate. I tried to make the educational goal of each game clear, either by written instructions, or orally in the lecture. I may need to further clarify going forward and link specifically to the course learning objectives. In addition, I will not use games that require participation before class such as the rap as students are less willing to participate in these activities. I tried to use a variety of activities to engage all learners, but as can be seen from the score sheet below, there is a trend of certain students performing across the board wheres others never participate. Those who perform well across the board in terms of the games also tend to do well on assignments.

I allowed groups to choose their own questions for the formative assessment. The instructions can be viewed in the document above pg 4 - 5. I was disappointed by the lack of participation, as students had two weeks to do this assessment, and there was no class during the week the assessment was due. However, I do think that those who participated benefitted by practicing their research and writing skills, and giving and receiving feedback from their peers. Below, you can view one of the forums.

Question: ‘The maxims are equity are difficult to reconcile at best, and damaging to the concept of legal certainty at worst. Courts should be weary in referring to maxims, and instead stick to established precedent.’

Discuss

RESPONSE

Wrote Response: Student A

Conducted Research: Student B & C

Word Count [755]

Q3: ‘The maxims are equity are difficult to reconcile at best, and damaging to the concept of legal certainty at worst. Courts should be weary in referring to maxims, and instead stick to established precedent.’

Discuss

Question 3:

Equitable Maxims Guide the Decisions of the Court and Allow for Legal Certainty

Generally, the maxims of equity are a set of guidelines or standards to ensure legal certainty which were devised by the court of equity as an aid to decide the cases that arise. The maxims of equity have been applied on a case-by-case basis and as such they have become established precedent. Consequently, the court must examine both the equitable maxims and precedent before awarding an equitable remedy, the two most common of which are injunctions and specific performance to ensure that the claimant is sufficiently compensated where the award of damages would be inadequate.

The maxim, “he who comes to equity must come with clean hands” denotes that the party claiming an equitable relief must demonstrate that he has not acted with impropriety in respect of the claim. This maxim was reflected in the case of Argyll v Argyll [1967] Ch 302, where Thomas J held that “the plaintiff’s adultery, repugnant though it be, should not license the husband to broadcast unchecked the most intimate confidences of earlier years….a person coming to equity must come with clean hands but the cleanliness required is to be judged in relation to the relief that is sought.” Consequently, an interlocutory injunction was granted to protect against the revelation of marital confidences, and the newspaper to which the Duke had communicated such information about the Duchess was restrained from publishing it. This illustrates that this maxim requires there to be a sufficient nexus between the relief being sought and conduct in the context of the facts.

This case is an early application of this maxim. The development of the maxims of equity are enshrined in cases as a result it has precedent. Therefore, equity promotes legal certainty through the maxims of equity and the precedent further enhances our understanding of the maxims by demonstrating circumstances where they have been applied. As such the court can look to both the equitable maxims and the existing precedent to make their decisions on a case.

Furthermore, the grant of specific performance may seem uncertain as courts are unwilling or even reluctant to grant it if it requires heavy supervision which can be burdensome on the courts. For instance, in Alfa Finance Holdings Ltd AD v Quarzewerke, the court held that it was contrary to principle and practice to make an order in a form that would leave a defendant in doubt of what was required to be in compliance. However, Specific performance is certain as it follows precedent and rules. In Marshall v Bertola, it was held that to determine the grant of equitable remedies, requirements should be met in order for specific performance to be granted even if it’s uncertain damages can also be claimed in addition to specific performance. Alan Schwartz opined that the promisees know the contract better than the court and would know that damages are inadequate in the very fact that they are claiming for specific performance this quote can be interpreted as the freedom of contract not being lessened as the parties of the contract are choosing the best remedy that they see fit.

Unlike the contractual remedy, damages which are always available, specific performance is left to the discretion of the court to decide upon using the equitable maxims, precedent and the facts of the case to determine the outcome that wound not cause undue hardship to either party. This was showcased in Patel v Ali where the court denied the grant of specific performance for a land contract because it would have left a disabled mother and her children without a home which would have caused “a hardship amounting to an injustice”. Moreover, these remedies that are available may not always be adequate and in this situation the person who applies for specific performance allows the promisee to receive the performance that he purchased. In Johnson v Clarke specific performance was granted to allow the purchaser to receive the performance which he purchased as the court will not enforce an agreement which amounts to a breach of trust. Therefore, the court is guided by precedent and would not grant a specific performance contrary to an existing equitable maxim.

Equitable maxims form a set of guidelines or standards devised by the court of equity to aid to deciding the cases that come before them. The court is guided by precedent which was developed due to the application of these maxims which ensure legal certainty to decide whether to grant equitable relief if the award of damages would be insufficient to adequately compensate the claimant.

FEEDBACK

Feedback composed by: Students D, E, F

Assisted in formulation of feedback: Students G & H

(Equitable Acquaintances)

Word count: 306

Although the response was short and concise, it should be noted that this written piece was comprehensive to an extent as it had the possibility of being more direct and well-written through a better use of grammatical structure.

Whilst reading this piece the intention of the writer was clearly demonstrated; however the thesis statement could have been better developed in order to encapsulate what was the stance taken on the above question and whether or not courts should stick to the established precedent. Thus, whilst reading the developed answer above it may be a bit challenging as persons may have difficulties in gaging the specific stance taken upon answering. However, it should be addressed that this was a good attempt by my fellow colleagues. Therefore that has to be the only critique found within the response.

The cases used as references were quite commendable as it clearly focuses on the principles that each specific case emanates as well as it truly assists in guiding the reader on the writer’s train of thought since it added value to the piece that was submitted by my fellow classmates. However to further accentuate this, it should be advised that some of the quotations used should have been more comprehensive via paraphrasing. It should be addressed that it would have been beneficial to discuss the cases of Nelson v Rye and Cave v Cave as the principles that emerged from the court proceedings of those cases were of substance to the discussion of maxims of equity. In addition, injunctions were mentioned at the beginning of the piece; however , throughout the formulated body it was not further addressed. Unfortunately, it should be noted that the conclusion presented could have been of a better structure since the thesis statement was not reinstated in such a way to clinch the response perfectly together.

RESPONSE

Done by : Sudents I & J

Reviewed by :Student K

Team : The Trust Fun

Our group approached the topic in a different way, leaving out mention of remedies in depth. We broke the topic up into two tenets, first, we looked at whether the maxims of equity would be damaging to the concept of legal certainty and next, quite briefly, whether both maxims of equity and established precedent are equal in weight.

First, we can look at whether the maxims of equity would be damaging to the concept of legal certainty. What is legal certainty? Legal certainty is the proposition that the law should be sufficiently clear to provide those subject to said laws with the means to predict the outcome of their actions, falling into the scope of rule of law.

In essence, maxims are applied where common law ‘stops’ to prevent injustice. Equity developed in a way to act in personam and is discretionary in nature. This is best illustrated in the Earl of Oxford’s Case where it was stated that man’s actions are so diverse and infinite that it is impossible to make any general law that can be aptly applied to every single predictable action and behaviour of man, as law would fail to predict human behaviour in certain circumstances. Therefore, law cannot always predict how men would act in terms of conscience, responses to wrongs and oppressive acts.

By this initial argument, one would be led to think that the maxims of equity are whimsical, being applied by virtue of man’s feelings, however throughout their development, this can be illustrated to be a fallacy. All maxims are applied in methodological ways. This is best demonstrated in the following:

Equity looks to the substance rather than the form

Equity looks at the substantial nature of any transaction rather than just its basic tenets. Equity therefore looks at the parties’ intentions and not the outcome of said transactions. This can be demonstrated in the case of Paul v Constance [1977].

Here, a husband left his wife and met the claimant, moving in with her two years later. He never formally divorced his first wife. Six years later, he received a lumpsum of money due to an injury claim from his place of employer, after which he opened a bank account in his own name, as he was not married to his partner. The bank assured him that the partner would be able to access the money, and he agreed telling her “This money is as much yours as mine." After his death in 1974, without a will, his wife attempted to close the account and claim the money from said account, however his partner protested.

Here, the maxim steps forward, methodologically, and states that the deceased party’s words and conduct illustrated that he wished for the money to be held on trust for his partner. By looking at the holistic intent of the parties, the court determined that there was a declaration of trust. As such, the maxim is not randomly enacted, but rather would be called upon where there is necessity, hinting at a form of certainty.

He who comes to equity must come with clean hands

Essentially, this maxim highlights that where a party has acted in a manner that is unfair or inequitable towards the other party would not be able to gain an equitable remedy in court. This is best illustrated in the Duchess of Argyll v Duke of Argyll [1967].

Here, the Duke and Duchess were married, and the duke petitioned for a divorce from the duchess due to her adultery. He went onto communicate with a newspaper statement about his wife’s personal conduct and financial affairs. The duchess attempted to seek an injunction to restrain the duke from communicating with said newspaper about her private life, personal affairs or private conduct communicated to the duke during their marriage. The injunction was granted to protect against the revelation of secrets shared in marriage.

This was so done because equity looks at the actions related to the claim, not the actions outside of the claim. In essence, the details given to the newspaper about the defendant’s conduct was protected due to their legally binding marriage and was not relevant in relation to her application for an injunction. It did not matter about the contents that she was barring from being revealed, but rather what was important was that the concept of confidentiality between spouses was not being upheld, hence the injunction was permitted. As such, this maxim of equity has a clear-cut application. Its methodological approach to the presented circumstances did not weigh outside factors, negating it of uncertainty.

Although two examples were used, there is a plethora of resources and cases that suggest that the maxims of equity are applied methodologically and predictably. Essentially, maxims act as rules of equity that subsequently lends to legal certainty. Precedent and equity, although sharing a legal space, occupy two separate spaces. They act as two opposing but complementary faces of the same coin, creating a symbiotic, dyadic balancing act.

While common law deals with cases of breach of contract, negligence, and fraud, equity essentially deals with breach of trust and tracing property. Equity also offers a wider range of remedies for their issues such as injunctions and rescissions, stepping away from the strict ruling for monetary remuneration in common law. Equity seeks to look at complex solutions for varied issues, highlighting the different spaces that precedent and equity occupy. However, they do not act as opposing forces, but rather, complement each other. Equity helps bolster the legal precedent, as where there is no legal principle set for a certain circumstance, equity would step in with a formula of certainty.

As such, the maxims of equity are not damaging to the concept of legal certainty both maxims of equity and established precedent are equal in weight.

FEEDBACK

Feedback by: Student L

Response to: First answer posted for Q3

Team: Justice League

Word count: 379

Firstly, I must commend my classmates for this informative piece which was a well attempted discussion on the maxims of equity and their impact on the concept of legal certainty. As one dives into the body of the discussion, they can infer that our classmates are trying to convey to us that the maxims of equity are not damaging to the concept of legal certainty as the question purports, but rather contributes to ensuring a high degree of legal certainty is preserved in the administration of justice. This can be inferred as they creditably analyzed the equitable maxim of ‘he who comes to equity must come with clean hands’ and delved into how the underlying principle in this maxim is reflective of legal certainty. With the use of Argyll v Argyll, they were further able to practically demonstrate how this maxim works to uphold legal certainty by establishing that the conduct must directly relate to the claim for which the claimants are seeking to gain equitable relief. Our classmates successfully conveyed to us that if this maxim of equity imposes such a threshold, it is unarguably evident that it contributes to the concept of legal certainty.

Nevertheless, it must be noted that readers may only be able to grasp the focus of the discussion and the stance being argued when they are already well into the body of the discussion. The significance of an introduction is to capture the readers’ minds, allowing them to zone into a specific matter in question and understand how you plan to structure your discussion so that they may easily follow along. This question specifically engages students to ascertain whether maxims of equity contribute to or damage the concept of legal certainty and whether courts should turn to them for guidance. Perhaps a better approach would have been to formulate a thesis statement clearly stating your stance on the above and how it will be further discussed and evidenced.

Additionally, the case of Dr. Nicholas Lewis v Secretary of Health would have aided in the discussion of this question as it directly relates to the maxim that ‘equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy’ and exemplifies how this maxim provides a level of cogency, a key focus of this question.

For the Law of Trusts, I introduced a mock exam that has been a big success with the students. Students must exchange papers with their peers, provide feedback, and then provide a reflective statement on how then can improve in order to get feedback from me. Below, you can view the mock exam, a student paper with feedback, and my feedback to the student.

My feedback:

Dear X,

I can see your major issue is going to be word count. The final exam is 2,000 words for the PQ and there are going to be far more issues than this. You exchanged with *student X*. I recommend checking out her paper again as her writing is concise but she still has an excellent level of analysis.

Your problem is the opposite of most students. You nearly want to do more analysis than you need to whereas most student do not do enough analysis. This is a good problem to have because it is easier to correct as compared to not knowing how to analyse. A good technique for you might be to write out your entire answer then edit to reach the word count.

You can go directly to the issue where the issue is obvious. For example, for Sandra and Mona, you didn’t need a whole discussion on whether the true is secret or fully secret. You could say that ’this is a fully secret trust because…’. You also didn’t need a whole paragraph on intention because ‘I leave my store’ is fairly straightforward. You just needed to focus on the communication and acceptance issue. I do like that you advised own the problems of lack of writing - that is some great practical analysis.

Similarly, for the shares, there are two main issues - whether Sandra intended to be a trustee (Milroy) or whether she had done everything in her power (Re Rose). There was no need for such lengthy discussion. She did everything in her power. The company rejected it. Apply case law of Re Rose and distinguish. Then consider whether she would be a trustee via Milroy. You are correct in your analysis in that it was meant to be a gift, but you can achieve this is fewer words. You were more concise with Jessica and Eduardo, I assumed because you were running low on time, but this is a good example of concise writing. I endorse the other comments made by Keriann on this paper.

Best,

Dr Perot

For Entertainment Law, my colleague and I used a padlet that we showed on screen every week. Students would send us links to post, or they would post them themselves. This provided a repository for students which gives them inspiration for their final assignment - a case study that they got to choose.

I collaborated with my colleague from Mona for our Law and Legal Systems classes to debate against each other. I organised alumni to be judges. The instructions given can be seen below.

I prepared this document for my Law and Legal Systems students. They take this course in the first semester of their first year. Tutorials are very different from what they have done in high school, so I provide this document which is meant to guide their preparation.

Law can be difficult to understand because there are not many visual representations that can be used to explain the concepts. I try to create visual aids to distill concepts. Below you can view:

1. Diagram of reception as a basis for development - Law and Legal Systems

2. Relationship between different types of legislation - statute, autonomic, delegated - Law and Legal Systems

3. Relationship between Freedom of Speech and other areas of Entertainment law - this is used so that students can keep this connection in mind throughout the course as freedom of speech is a key theme

4. Diagram on how tax avoidance strategies are combined by companies - Corporate Finance

5. Parties to the trust - the individuals on this slide are used throughout the semester to illustrate different relationships - Law of Trusts

6. Diagram that identifies how injunctions operate - Equitable Remedies