4- Statutory Interpretation

Question 1

What is Stat. Interpretation?

Answer 1

Judges interpret the law so it’s understood by the jury.

Question 2

Why is Stat. Interpretation needed?

Answer 2

The meaning of the law in AofP should be clear and explicit, but this isn’t always achieved.

A statute of Par includes sections defining certain words, these sections are called Interpretation Sections.

Par has also passed the Interpretation Act 1978, which makes clear that unless the contrary appeals, he includes she, and singular includes plural.

Despite all this, many cases go to court because there’s a dispute over the meaning of an AofP.

Question 3

Reasons why the meaning of AofP might be unclear:

Answer 3

1. A broad term
2. Ambiguity
3. A drafting error
4. New developments
5. Changes in the use of language

Question 4

Reasons why the meaning of AofP might be unclear- A broad term

Answer 4

Words designed to cover several possibilities can lead to problems as to how wide the meaning should go.

Example: Brock v DPD (1993)- it was decided that ‘type’ had a wider meaning than ‘breed’. It could cover dogs which were not pedigree, but had a number of characteristics of such a dog.

Question 5

Reasons why the meaning of AofP might be unclear- Ambiguity

Answer 5

A word with 2 or + meanings may not be clear which one should be used.

Question 6

Reasons why the meaning of AofP might be unclear- A drafting error

Answer 6

Parliamentary Counsel who drafted the original Bill may have made an error that has been noticed by Par.

Can occur when Bill is amended several times while going through Par.

Also when several old Acts have been brought together in 1 Act, there may be differences in the wording of sections.

Ex: ‘cause’ and ‘inflict’ both referring to grievous bodily harm.

Question 7

Reasons why the meaning of AofP might be unclear- New developments

Answer 7

An old Act might not cover present situations.

Ex: Royal College of Nursing v DHSS (1981)- medical science and methods has changed since the passing of the Abortion Act 1967.

Question 8

Reasons why the meaning of AofP might be unclear- Changes in the use of language

Answer 8

Meaning of words can change over the years.

Question 9

The 3 rules- background information

Answer 9

In English law, over the years, judges have developed 3 different rules of interpretation.

Some judges prefer to use one rule, others prefer another one.

The interpretation of a statute can therefore differ depending on the judge hearing the case.

Question 10

What are the 3+1 main rules of stat. interpretation?

Answer 10

1. Literal rule
2. Golden Rule
3. Mischief rule
4. Purposive approach

Question 11

Literal Rule

Answer 11

Under this rule, courts will give words their plain, ordinary or literal meaning, even if the result is absurd.

Rule developed in the early 19th century and was the main rule used for the first part of the 20h century.

Still used as a starting point for interpreting legislation.

Question 12

Example of use of Literal Rule

Answer 12

Whitley v Chappell (1868)-

D was charged under a section that made it an offence to impersonate ‘any person entitled to vote’.

D had pretended to be a person on the ‘voters list’, but who had died.

The court held that D was not guilty since a dead person is not, in the literal meaning of the words, ‘entitled to vote’.

Other ex: London and North Eastern Railway Co. v Berriman (1946.)

Question 13

Golden Rule

Answer 13

This rule is a modification of the literal rule.

It starts by looking at the literal meaning but the court is then allowed to avoid an interpretation which would lead to an absurd result.

There are 2 views on how far it should be used

Question 14

2 views on how far the Golden Rule whould be used

Answer 14

NARROW APPLICATION:

Court may only choose between the possible meanings of a word/phrase. If there is only one meaning, that must be taken.

Ex: Adler v George (1964)-

The Official Secrets Act 1920 made it an offence to obstruct Her Majesty’s Forces ‘in the vicinity’ of a prohibited place.

The D’s had obstructed HM Forces in the prohibited place, but they argued that they were not guilty bc the wording didn’t apply to anyone in the prohibited place. T
he court found them guilty as it would be absurd if those causing an obstruction outside the place were guilty, but anyone inside it not.

WIDER APPLICATION:

Words have only one clear meaning, but the meaning could lead to a repugnant situation in which the court feels that using the clear meaning would produce a result which should not be allowed.

The court will then modify the words of the statute in order to avoid this problem.

Ex: Re Sigsworth (1935)-

The son had murdered his mother.

She hadn’t made a will, so her estate would have been inherited by her first child according to the Administration of Justice Act.

This would mean that the accused son would inherit.

The court wouldn’t let the murderer benefit from his crime.

Question 15

Mischief Rule

Answer 15

Under this rule, the court should see what the law was before the Act was passed in order to discover what gap or mischief the Act was intended to cover.

Court should then interpret the Act in such a way that the gap is covered.

Question 16

Example of Mischief Rule

Answer 16

Smith v Hughes (1960)-

Court considered appeals against the conviction of 6 different women.

Under the Street Offences Act 1959, which said it was an offence for a prostitute to solicit in a public place for the purpose of prostitution.

The women had been on a balcony and windows.

Court decided they were guilty bc the purpose of the Act was to clean the streets to enable people to walk without being molested or solicited by prostitutes.

Another example, Eastbourne Borough Council v Stirling (2000.)

Question 17

Purposive Approach

Answer 17

Goes beyond the Mischief Rule in that the court doesn’t just look for the gap in the old law, but also decides what they believe Par meant to achieve.

Question 18

Example of Purposive Approach

Answer 18

R v Sec of State for Health-

Act stated embryo meant a ‘live human embryo where fertilisation is complete’, embryos were created by a cell nuclear replacement, so there was no fertilisation.

Point of law: Parliament could not have intended to distinguish between embryos, so the Act applied.

Question 19

Advantages of Literal Rule and Purposive Approach

Answer 19

LITERAL RULE

• Leaves law making to Par
• Makes law more certain

PURPOSIVE APPROACH

• Leads to justice in individual cases
• Broad approach covering more situations
  Allows for new technology

Question 20

Disadvantages of Literal Rule and Purposive Approach

Answer 20

LITERAL RULE

• Assumes every Act is perfectly crafted
• Words have more than one meaning
• Can lead to absurd results or unjust decisions

PURPOSIVE APPROACH

• Leads to judicial law-making
• Can make law uncertain
• Difficult to discover the intention of Parliament.

Question 21

Adv and Disadv of Literal Rule

Answer 21

ADVANTAGES

• Follows wording of Par
• Prevents unelected judge making law
• Makes the law more certain
• Easier to predict how the judges will interpret the law

DISADVANTAGES

• Not all Acts are perfectly drafted
• Words have more than one meaning
• Can lead to unfair or unjust decisions

Question 22

Adv and Disadv of Golden Rule

Answer 22

ADVANTAGES

• Respects the words of Par
• Allows the judge to choose the most sensible meaning
• Avoids the worst problems of the literal rule

DISADVANTAGES

• Can only be used in limited situations
• Not possible to predict when the courts will use it
• It is a ‘feeble parachute’ (an escape route that can’t do much)

Question 23

Adv and Disadv of Mischief Rule

Answer 23

ADVANTAGES

• Promotes the purpose of the law
• Fills in the gap in the law
• Produces a ‘just result’

DISADVANTAGES

• Risk of judicial law-making
• Not as wide as the purposive approach
• Limited to looking back at the old law
• Can make the law uncertain

Question 24

Adv and Disadv of Purposive Approach

Answer 24

ADVANTAGES

• Leads to justice in individual cases
• Allows for new developments in technology
• Avoids absurd decisions

DISADVANTAGES

• Difficult to find Parliament’s intention
• Allows judges to make law
• Leads to uncertainty of the law

Question 25

What are external and internal aids?

Answer 25

Documents judges use to help them interpret statutes.

Internal: Contained within the statute itself
External: Found within legislation.

Question 26

Which intrinsic (internal) aids can be found in statutes?

Answer 26

1. Short title
2. Long title- explains briefly Parliament’s intentions
3. Preamble (only old Acts have these)- Theft Act includes one
4. Interpretation sections- example: Theft Act 1968 defines ‘property’ in s 4 (1) as including ‘money and all other property real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property’.
5. Any headings before a group of sections, and any schedules attached to the Act.
6. Marginal notes explaining different sections, although these are only helpful comments put in by the printer and don’t give Par’s intention.
7. Other sections in the Act, as these might help

Question 27

Provide a KEY CASE that explains how other sections of an act may serve as intrinsic aids to stat interpretation.

Answer 27

Example: Harrow LBC v Shah and Shah (1999):
- Ds were charged under the National Lottery Act 1993
- The subsection under which they were charged didn’t include
any words indicating either that MR is required or not, or a
provision for a defence of ‘due diligence’.
- Another subsection however, clearly allows a defence of ‘due
diligence’. This was an important point in the court’s decision
that the subsection under which they were charged was an
offence of strict liability.

Question 28

Which external sources have been accepted as helpful in explaining the meaning of Acts?

Answer 28

1. Previous Acts on the same topic
2. The historical setting
3. Earlier case law
4. Dictionaries of the time.

Question 29

How can dictionaries be used as external aids?

Answer 29

It must be a dictionary published at the time when the Act was passed. This is bc the meanings of words change over time.

Question 30

How have attitudes changed over time for which extrinsic aids?

Answer 30

1. Hansard- official report of what was said in Par when the Act was debated.
2. Reports of law reform bodies such as the Law Commission which led to the passing of the Act.
3. International conventions/regulations implemented by English legislation.

Question 31

How has the use of Hansard as an extrinsic aid changed over time?

Answer 31

• Until 1992 there was a rule that Hansard couldn’t be used by courts
• Lord Denning in a 1979 case used it, and the HoL disapproved of this, explaining it promoted confusion instead of clarity.
• However, in Pepper v Hart (1993) the HoL relaxed the rule and Hansard could be used in a limited way:
  
  1. If legislation is ambiguous or leads to absurdity
  2. The material relied on consists of 1 or more statements by the
     promoter/s of the Bill
  3. The statements relied on are clear
• A wider use of Hansard is permitted where the court is considering an Act that introduced an international convention or European Directive into English law.