Pg 24

Question 1

If an SOL has already run for a legal suit, how does that affect the equitable remedy of laches?

Answer 1

It just affects the burden of proof. Laches is a defense, so usually the burden of proof is on the defendant to establish the delay was unreasonable. But if the delay in bringing suit exceeds the SOL, it is presumed unreasonable and the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove that it was not unreasonable. The defendant still has to show prejudice.

Essentially this means that before the SOL runs, the defendant has the burden to prove that the delay was unreasonable, but after the SOL runs, the delay is presumed to be unreasonable and the plaintiff has the burden to prove that it was not

Question 2

What are the elements for laches?

Answer 2

– P unreasonably delayed asserting his rights against the defendant
– the delay caused prejudice to the defendant

Question 3

What are the two categories of prejudice that justify a laches defense?

Answer 3

– economic prejudice
– defence prejudice

*** Both need to be addressed on an essay to get full credit

Question 4

What is economic prejudice that creates laches?

Answer 4

When the defendant makes expenditures that are based on the reasonable assumption that the the plaintiff will not be asserting his rights. I.e.: the plaintiff and the defendant are neighbours and the defendant buys an above -ground pool that encroaches on the P’s land by 1 foot, and he uses the pool for five years without the plaintiff objecting. Then the defendant puts in a built-in pool that does the same thing. If the P files for an injunction to remove the encroachment, the defendant can raise laches based on the plaintiff’s delay in certain rights to stop the encroachment. Since the defendant made an expenditure to put in the permanent pool, that was economic prejudice

Question 5

What is defence prejudice or evidentiary prejudice as part of laches?

Answer 5

Unreasonable delay makes it more difficult for the defendant to defend against the claim. Because of the delay, there is lots of material evidence, witness memory has faded, important records have been misplaced or destroyed in the ordinary course, so all of these things would put the dependent in a disadvantaged position which makes it harder for him to assert a defence against the plaintiff’s claim.

Question 6

If X and Y are neighbours and X wants to put up a wall between the property so he approaches Y and Y says she prefers the wall to be 10 feet high so that people can’t look over it, then X builds a 10 foot high wall and then Y files an injunction to have it removed because it affects the natural lighting into the house. What defence can X raise?

Answer 6

Equitable estoppel because when Y told X he wanted a 10 foot high wall, that induced X to build that kind of wall, so why cannot now assert a different position since it would cause material prejudice to the defendant since he expended time, money, and effort to build the wall

Question 7

Is silence alone enough for equitable estoppel?

Answer 7

Only if:

• it induced prejudicial reliance that was KNOWN to the party to be estopped but nothing was done, or
• the person had a DUTY to speak because he had superior knowledge, he knew that the other person was ignorant of the true facts, or there was a fiduciary relationship

Question 8

What is the common factor between estoppel and laches?

Answer 8

Prejudice to the defendant

Question 9

Where does the prejudice to the defendant come from in estoppel and in laches?

Answer 9

– estoppel: it comes from the action or inaction of the plaintiff
– laches: it comes from the delay in bringing a suit

Question 10

What are the elements of equitable estoppel?

Answer 10

• some action or inaction by the plaintiff
  – that induced the defendant to take an action or refrain from acting in a way that is prejudicial to the defendant’s interest
  – the plaintiff now asserts a changed position
  – the change causes a material prejudice to the defendant

Question 11

How do you prove that a defendant has been materially prejudiced for equitable estoppel?

Answer 11

Show that the party relied on the misleading conduct and had no knowledge of true facts

Question 12

What are conscience defences?

Answer 12

These bar a P’s claims that are morally tainted even though they may be legally sound. The court will not lower its dignity by granting relief in these cases. The focus is on the interest of the court and the public, not the relative fairness between the parties. These defences only relate to the plaintiffs

Question 13

What are the major conscience defenses?

Answer 13

• unclean hands
  – in pari delicto
  – unconscionability

Question 14

1

Answer 14

1

Question 15

If a plaintiff has unclean hands, or his behaviour was offensive to the court, then what is his only option for recovery?

Answer 15

He can pursue a legal claim but he cannot get equitable relief because the court will not acknowledge the rights he is asserting

Question 16

Can a court raise unclean hands sua sponte?

Answer 16

Yes, to ensure that they do not benefit a wrongdoer

Question 17

What is considered to be unclean conduct for the conscience defence of unclean hands?

Answer 17

Wrongful conduct that goes beyond negligence. It must been intentional, willful, reckless, blatant disregard for the rights of others, or grossly negligent, and of a serious magnitude. Minor negligence is not enough. The contract must be sufficiently egregious such that the claim would be tainted by it. The misconduct needn’t be criminal or even enough to justify legal proceedings.

Question 18

What is the causal connection element of unclean hands?

Answer 18

The action that the plaintiff dirtied his hands with must be sufficiently connected to the matter that the court is considering. It isn’t enough if he did something totally unrelated to the case. It’s important that the plaintiff’s hands got dirty in acquiring the right he is asserting in court

Question 19

What are the two elements of unclean hands?

Answer 19

– P engages in unclean conduct

– there is a causal connection between the unclean conduct and the suit he is currently in the court for

Question 20

If a plaintiff fraudulently conveys property to the defendant to shield the plaintiff from his creditors with the idea that the defendant will reconvey the property to the plaintiff after the creditor dispute ends, but then the defendant doesn’t reconvey the property, so the plaintiff sues in equity for specific performance, what will likely happen?

Answer 20

Because the case involves a plaintiff trying to defraud his creditors, the courts would likely find unclean hands was present as long as you can show that the bad contract was closely related to the cause of action

Question 21

What does “in pari delicto“ mean?

Answer 21

Equal fault. If the plaintiff’s fault is equal to or greater than the defendant’s fault, then courts decline relief to either party. The idea is the integrity of the court. Just negligence, gross negligence, or recklessness is not enough, you need a higher level of wrongful conduct such as intentional or wilful conduct.

Question 22

If a plaintiff sued a defendant to enforce an illegal act, what are the courts like to do?

Answer 22

Use in pari delicto to leave the parties as they are. The courts will not enforce any aspect of a contract or give damages or restitution to either side

Question 23

What is involved in the defence of unconscionability?

Answer 23

When the court finds that as a matter of law the contractual terms are so one-sided that they are oppressive. This is measured at the time of formation and is meant to ensure fair bargaining.