“Equal” refers to fairness in legal cases, but “equitable” combines fairness and equality for a balanced outcome. An equitable division of assets in divorce considers potential earnings. “Fair” is associated with “equity” in a separate court that may grant injunctions for direct redress.
“Equal,” in legal usage, refers to something that is considered equal and fair in relation to two or more parties involved in a particular instance. This term is usually used to refer to the outcome, or desired outcome, of a case, and indicates that not only equality but also fairness was used. Someone with a lot of money paying the same amount for a fine as someone with little money may be equal, but it’s not necessarily fair. Equitable, therefore, refers to legal practices where fairness is imparted to equality to create an outcome that is considered to be balanced.
A decision is said to be fair when it is considered both fair and equal for the people involved. In divorce proceedings, for example, an equitable division of assets and resources is often used rather than an equitable division. An equitable division of assets would mean that half of all assets would be given to each of the people in the marriage, with no further consideration for either party, which may not necessarily be equitable. When an equal division is used instead, the potential and future earnings of each party are also considered, which often results in alimony or other compensation being paid by one party to the other.
The term “fair” is also used in association with the legal concept of “equity” as it differs from the law. An equity court is a separate court from a court and follows a tradition with roots in the English common law system. This type of court can function similarly to a tribunal, but usually has slightly different powers and may grant an injunction rather than compensation. Such a court’s ruling may be considered fair since it is usually intended to redress grievances more directly.
When a court hears a case in which one person has accused another of stealing their property, then the sentence is typically a reward of financial compensation if the accuser wins the case. While this may be satisfactory in some cases, compensation may ultimately not be desired and the prosecutor may instead want his property returned. A court of equity may order an injunction that would seek the return of stolen property, rather than simple financial compensation. This injunction may be considered fairer as the original property is returned, rather than simply a financial amount deemed appropriate for the property.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
