Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Laches is a legal term derived from the Old French laschesse, meaning "remissness" or "dilatoriness", and is viewed as the opposite of "vigilance". [1] [2] [3] The United States Supreme Court case Costello v. United States 365 US 265, 282 (1961) is often cited for a definition of laches. [4]
The doctrine states that the crown is not subject to statutes of limitations or to the doctrine of laches. [3] This means that the crown can proceed with actions that would be barred if brought by an individual due to the passage of time.
The doctrine of laches is based on the maxim that equity aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights. Vigilantibus non dormientibus aequitas subvenit. But also note, aequitas ignorantiae opitulatur, oscitantiae non item (equity assists ignorance, but not carelessness).
The doctrine of laches is intended to prevent injustice to the defendant because of the plaintiff reserving action for the time most convenient or advantageous for them. Substantial performance A rule of equity in which, by contrast to fundamental breach, a contract that is substantially performed before a breach occurs may still be upheld to ...
This includes "he who comes to equity must come with clean hands" (that is, the court will not assist a claimant who is himself in the wrong or acting for improper motives), laches (equitable remedies will not be granted if the claimant has delayed unduly in seeking them), "equity will not assist a volunteer" (meaning that a person cannot ...
Doctrine of chances; Doctrine of colourability; Doctrine of equivalents; Doctrine of exoneration of liens; Doctrine of foreign equivalents; Doctrine of indivisibility; Doctrine of inherency; Doctrine of international exhaustion; Doctrine of laches; Doctrine of merger; Doctrine of necessity; Doctrine of non-derogation from grants; Doctrine of ...
Laches. The majority noted that the four dissenting justices would have barred the Oneida's claim under laches. However, the majority noted that "we do not reach this issue today" because the District Court had ruled against the counties laches defense, and the counties had not raised the issue in the Second Circuit. [23]
The doctrine of estoppel (which may prevent a party from asserting a right) is often confused with the doctrine of waiver (which relates to relinquishing a right once it has arisen). It also substantially overlaps with, but is distinct from, the equitable doctrine of laches.