Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/108922
Type: | Journal article |
Title: | Unity in remedies - finding the best remedy - the adequacy of common law remedies |
Author: | Wright, D. |
Citation: | University of Western Australia Law Review, 2014; 38(1):30-47 |
Publisher: | University of Western Australia Law School |
Issue Date: | 2014 |
ISSN: | 0042-0328 |
Statement of Responsibility: | David Wright |
Abstract: | The great barrier faced by the court when awarding the best remedy is the “adequacy of common law remedies” rule. The rule is such that the availability of the equitable remedy is theoretically dependent on the inadequacy of the remedy at law. Importantly it imposes a jurisdictional limitation (or rule). This rule is wrong in theory and not followed in practice. Gradually this rule has morphed into a consideration in the award of remedies. Unfortunately this consideration uses essentially the same wording as the rule, so while textbooks and judges still employ this language, now they are essentially talking about the consideration, not the rule. In its own way and at its own pace, each jurisdiction is searching for the best or most appropriate remedy. |
Rights: | Copyright of articles published in The University of Western Australia Law Review remains with the individual authors. |
Published version: | http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/uwatlw38&g_sent=1&casa_token=&collection=journals&id=38 |
Appears in Collections: | Aurora harvest 3 Law publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
RA_hdl_108922.pdf Restricted Access | Restricted Access | 440.25 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.