The Difference Between Legal & Equitable Remedies

When you suffer a wrong that requires legal action, the first question a Legal Expert will ask is: “What remedy are you seeking?” The answer dictates the nature of your claim, the evidence required, and even your right to a jury trial. The US legal system inherited two distinct categories of relief from English jurisprudence—remedies “at law” and remedies “in equity”. Understanding this centuries-old distinction is crucial for anyone navigating a civil dispute.

Historically, the common law courts in England were rigid, primarily offering one type of relief: monetary damages (the legal remedy). If money couldn’t solve the problem, you were left without a remedy. This limitation led to the creation of the Court of Chancery (Courts of Equity), which provided a more flexible, fairness-based approach to justice. Though the two court systems have since merged in the United States, the fundamental difference between the remedies themselves—money vs. action—remains central to modern civil procedure.

Legal Remedies: Compensation for Loss

Legal remedies, often referred to as a “remedy at law,” originate from the English common law courts. They are designed to compensate the injured party for their losses and are almost always awarded in the form of a specific amount of money. The goal of a legal remedy is to make the plaintiff “whole again” by restoring them to the position they were in before the wrongful act occurred.

The Main Types of Damages (Legal Remedies)

Type of Damage	Purpose	Example
Compensatory Damages	To restore the plaintiff’s monetary loss (medical bills, lost wages, property damage).	Payment for a hospital stay after an accident.
Consequential Damages	To cover losses that flow indirectly, but predictably, from the defendant’s wrongful actions.	Lost profits due to a key machine breaking after a supplier breached a delivery contract.
Punitive Damages	To punish the defendant for particularly egregious or willful misconduct and to deter future similar behavior.	Awarded in addition to compensatory damages when the defendant acted with malice or fraud.
Nominal Damages	A token amount (e.g., $1) awarded when a legal right was violated, but no actual financial harm was suffered.	Awarded to acknowledge a technical breach of contract where the plaintiff proves no real loss.

Equitable Remedies: Orders for Action

Equitable remedies, or “equitable relief,” are judicial remedies that emerged from the courts of equity, guided by principles of fairness and conscience. They are non-monetary and require the defendant to either perform a specific action or refrain from doing one. These remedies are generally discretionary, meaning the judge decides whether to grant them based on the specific facts and justice of the case, rather than being awarded as a matter of right (like money damages).

Key Types of Equitable Relief

1. Injunction: This is a court order compelling a party to either do something (mandatory injunction) or stop doing something (prohibitory injunction). Injunctions are frequently used to prevent irreparable harm, such as stopping a former employee from disclosing trade secrets or halting the construction of a building.
2. Specific Performance: An order compelling a breaching party to complete the obligations under a contract. It is almost exclusively granted in cases involving unique property, such as a rare piece of art or, most commonly, real estate, because a comparable substitute cannot be purchased with money damages.
3. Rescission: This remedy cancels a contract entirely, restoring the parties to the position they were in before the contract was ever signed (“status quo ante”). It is often granted in cases of fraud, mutual mistake, or misrepresentation.
4. Reformation: A court-ordered rewriting of a contract to correct a mistake and accurately reflect the true, original intent of the parties.
5. Constructive Trust: A powerful remedy where a court imposes a trust on property wrongfully obtained by one party, effectively compelling them to hold the property for the benefit of the wronged party.

The Doctrine of “Clean Hands” and Discretion

A core difference between law and equity is that legal remedies (damages) are available as a matter of right once the plaintiff proves a violation of a legal right. Equitable remedies, by contrast, are granted at the discretion of the presiding judge. This discretion is heavily guided by established maxims of equity, which function as principles of fairness.

In modern US law, a single court can typically award both legal and equitable remedies. A plaintiff in a single lawsuit may seek both monetary damages (Legal Remedy) and an injunction (Equitable Remedy). However, the court will almost always look to the adequacy of the legal remedy first. If money can truly solve the problem, the court will likely deny the request for discretionary equitable relief.

Summary: Key Takeaways on Legal and Equitable Remedies

1. Legal Remedies (Law): These primarily consist of monetary damages and are available to the successful claimant as a matter of right upon proving a legal violation.
2. Equitable Remedies (Equity): These are non-monetary orders (like injunctions or specific performance) and are granted at the court’s discretion based on principles of fairness.
3. The Adequacy Test: A court will generally only grant an equitable remedy if it determines that a legal remedy (money damages) would be insufficient or inadequate to provide complete justice.
4. Historical Roots: The distinction stems from the separate English court systems: the rigid Common Law courts and the flexible Courts of Chancery (Equity).

---

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Legal Remedies, Equitable Remedies, Damages, Injunction, Specific Performance, Common Law, Equity Jurisdiction, Contract Rescission, Constructive Trust, Remedy in Law and Equity, Legal Relief, Judicial Remedies, Legal Expert