INEQUITY IN EQUITABLE SET-OFF: TELFORD V HOLT REVISITED
Keywords:Equity, Equitable Set-off, Legal Set-off, Inequity, Fairness, Telford v Holt, Close Connection Rule, Coordinate Relationship Interpretive Approach, Discrete Interpretive Approach, Interconnected Claims, Unconnected Claims Notification, Residual Fairness, Debt, Monetary Claim
AbstractThe doctrine of equitable set-off is significant across a broad array of legal arenas. To explore equitable set-off, this article revisits Telford v Holt, a 1987 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. A review of this seminal decision and its progeny assists in formulating the doctrine of equitable set-off in the modern age. Telford v Holt simultaneously: (i) furnishes the substantive juridical framework for assessing equitable set-off claims, and (ii) typifies the intractability of resorting to a residual fairness standard under the “close connection rule” of equitable set-off. This intractability is particularly pronounced where two or more pitiable parties, including an equitable set-off claimant, lay claim to the same asset.
Download data is not yet available.