0.5 - Golden rule Flashcards
What is the golden rule?
Where judges decide that the literal rule produces absurd results when interpreting statute.
What is the golden rule an extension of?
It is an extension of the literal rule, where words will be given their literal meaning unless the result would be absurd.
What is the narrow approach?
Where the court may only choose between the possible meanings of the word. If there is only one, then that must be taken.
What is the wide approach?
Where the words only have one clear meaning which would lead to an absurd result, the court will use the golden rule to modify the words in order to avoid the absurdity.
Adler v George
Under the Official Secrets Act 1920, it was an offence to obstruct a member of the armed forces ‘in the vicinity’ of a prohibited place. The defendant was actually in the prohibited place, rather than ‘in the vicinity’ of it, at the time of the obstruction.
The Court applied the golden rule. It would be absurd for a person to be liable if they were near a prohibited place and not if they were actually in it. His conviction was therefore upheld.
What approach was used in Adler v George?
Narrow
Re Sigsworth
A son murdered his mother, who had not made a will. Under the statute setting the law on intestacy, as her only child he was entitled to inherit her entire estate. The literal rule would lead to an absurd result: therefore, the golden rule was applied and he inherited nothing.
What approach was used in Re Sigsworth?
Wide
What are advantages of the golden rule?
Errors in drafting can be corrected immediately.
Provides an escape route from the absurd decisions which can be produced by the literal rule.
Respects the doctrine of the Separation of Powers and the Supremacy of Parliament by only allowing judges enough freedom to correct errors. They are not deciding what parliament intended.
By avoiding absurdities Parliaments true intentions can be put into force.
What are disadvantages of the golden rule?
There is no clear guidance about how and when the rule should be used and no definition of what an absurd result is before deciding to avoid it.
It is little more than the literal rule and such is subject to similar criticisms regarding reasonable expectations of the use of language and drafting of legislation.
Brings ‘common sense’ into the law.
Judges can and have effectively re-written statute law which goes against the doctrine of Separation of Powers and Supremacy of Parliament (Re Sigsworth).
