author={Patrick Polden},
  journal={The Cambridge Law Journal},
  pages={575 - 611}
  • P. Polden
  • Published 11 December 2002
  • Law, History
  • The Cambridge Law Journal
Views about the nature and extent of the “fusion” effected by the Judicature Acts frequently focus narrowly on those cases which determined the doctrinal position, with insufficient regard for the accompanying changes to practice, procedure and structures. This article examines the means by which the promoters of the legislation and other interested parties sought to promote or restrain its formidable fusionist potential. It explores the use of cross-jurisdictional appointments to infuse equity… 
Preparing for Fusion: Reforming the Nineteenth-Century Court of Chancery, Part I
  • M. Lobban
  • History, Law
    Law and History Review
  • 2004
In 1850, William Carpenter, a reform-minded journalist, called the court of Chancery “an instrument of oppression” and noted that “[t]he madhouses, the workhouses, and the gaols, in all parts of the
Chancery Reform and Law Reform
Michael Lobban shows how dissatisfaction with the law-equity split in English civil justice predated the Judicature Act reforms by two generations at least (one could argue two-and-a half centuries
A path already travelled in domestic orders? From fragmentation to constitutionalisation in the global legal order
Abstract Theories of fragmentation and constitutionalisation have long been presented as antagonistic accounts of the global legal order. Fragmentation theorists posit a non-hierarchical order
Der Zivilprozess in England
Obwohl das englische Rechtssystem seit dem Mittelalter stark zentralisiert war, war es zu Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts noch weit davon entfernt, einheitlich zu sein. Es existierten drei zentrale
A Conceptual Account of Equitable and Statutory Assignments
  • C. H. Tham
  • Political Science
    Understanding the Law of Assignment
  • 2019
Statutory Dealings in Specific Classes of Intangible Assets
  • C. H. Tham
  • Business
    Understanding the Law of Assignment
  • 2019


1878 (311) LXIII. Background and discussion papers are in PRO LCO 1/4±10
    Builders of our Law
      PRO LCO 1/11. Negotiations are in PRO LCO 1/5. 230 (1883±4) 28 S.J. 2. Some judges' responses to the ®nal oer are in PRO LCO 1/5 and minutes of the Judges' Council on 10
        Justice Pearson'' (1886) 2 L.Q.R. 373±376. According to Manson, Builders of our Law
          PRO LCO 1/14; (1884) 77 L.T. 212. The objection had also been made in Parliament by F.A. Inderwick of the Admiralty bar: Parl. Debs
            Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875, s. 8
              235 (1881±2) 26 S.J. 52, and see also (1883)
              • C. Warton)
              PRO LCO 1/4. Those chosen normally picked their circuits in order of seniority