Pawlett v Attorney General (1667) Hardres 465
Plaintiff entitled to sue the Crown in equity
Facts
The plaintiff (P) mortgaged his property to a man named Ludlow. P failed to make payments in terms of the mortgage due, he claimed, due to the plague. Upon Ludlow’s death, his interest in the mortgage passed to his son and heir. His heir was attained of high treason. As a result, the mortgaged property was forfeited to the King.
Issues
The question before the Court of Exchequer was whether or not P could have any remedy against the King. It was argued for the King that there was no such remedy. P argued that the King cannot deny common equity and that common equity is due against the King as natural justice is. Furthermore, it would be very inconvenient if the passing of property to the King discharged the equity of redemption in circumstances where there is no wilful default by the debtor, such was the case for P.
Decision/Outcome
The Court held that citizens were indeed entitled to sue the Crown in equity. The Court observed that P ought to be relieved against the King because the King is the fountain and head of justice and equity. It should therefore not be presumed that he will be found lacking in either. Furthermore, it would derogate from the King’s honour if the equity could not be applied as against him as it would be applied against a common person. In reaching its conclusion, the Court drew a distinction between a trust and a power of redemption. A trust is created by contract but a power of redemption is an equitable right inherent in the land or property.
277 words
Updated 19 March 2026
This article accurately summarises the seventeenth-century case of Pawlett v Attorney General (1667) Hardres 465, a foundational authority in equity and land law concerning the equity of redemption and the Crown’s position in equity. The case summary remains historically and legally accurate as a statement of the common law principles it established.
Readers should note, however, that the procedural and constitutional context in which the Crown may be sued has changed substantially. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 now governs civil proceedings against the Crown in England and Wales, replacing much of the older prerogative and equitable framework for suing the Crown. The principle that equitable rights such as the equity of redemption bind the Crown remains relevant, but students should not rely on this case as a guide to the modern procedural rules for bringing claims against the Crown. For current procedure, the 1947 Act and associated Civil Procedure Rules should be consulted.
