Chapter 18- Statutory interpretation

Question 1

What is London and North Eastern Railway Co. v Berriman and what does it relate to?

Answer 1

• The Literal Rule
• Railway worker killed while doing maintenance of track
• Widow tried to claim compensation as there hadn’t been a look out provided in accordance with the Fatal Accidents Act which stated that a look-out should be provided for the purposes of ‘relaying or repairing’
• The court took the words ‘relaying’ and ‘repairing’ literally and said that oiling points was maintaining and not relaying or repairing
• so claim failed

Question 2

What is Re Sigsworth and what does it relate to?

Answer 2

• The Golden Rule
• Son had murdered his mum
• Mum hadn’t made a will, so normally her estate would be inherited by her next of kin according to the the rules in the Administration of Justice Act - meaning the son would inherit
• No ambiguity in the words of the Act, but court wouldn’t let a murderer benefit from his crime
• Held the literal rule shouldn’t apply

Question 3

What is Eastbourne Borough Council v Stirling and what does it relate to?

Answer 3

• The Mischief Rule
• Taxi driver charged with ‘plying for hire in any street’ without a licence
• Vehicle parked on a taxi rank on the station forecourt, not on a street
• Found guilty as although the taxi was on private land he was likely to get customers from the street

Question 4

What is R v Registrar-General, ex parte Smith and what does it apply to?

Answer 4

• Case uses the Purposive Approach
• Charles Smith wanted birth certificate as he was adopted
• At the time he was detained in Broadmoor having committed murder and manslaughter
• He also suffered serious mental instabilities
• 2nd killing was a prisoner who he thought was his adoptive mum
• Under s1 Adoption Act 1976 the birth certificate should be supplied at the age of 18
• However, he didn’t get access as Parliament didn’t intend for people to get hurt

Question 5

What is Allen v Emmerson and what does it apply to?

Answer 5

• The ejusdem generis rule
• Court had to interpret the phrase ‘theatres and other places of amusement’ and decide if it applied to a funfair
• As there was only 1 specific word of ‘theatres’ courts decided it did come under the general term

Question 6

What is Tempest v Kilner and what does it apply to?

Answer 6

• Expressio unius exclusio alterius
• Court had to decide whether the Statute of Frauds 1677 applied to a contract for the sale of stocks and shares
• The list ‘goods, wares and merchandise’ wasn’t followed by any general words, so the court held that only contracts for those three types of things were affected by the statute, because stocks and shares were not caught by the statute

Question 7

What is Inland Revenue Commisioners v Frere and what does it apply to?

Answer 7

• Noscitur a sociis
• case involved interpreting a section which set out rules for ‘interest, annuities or other annual interest’
• The first use of the word ‘interest’ could have meant any interest paid whether daily. monthly or annually
• Because of the words ‘other annual interest’, the court decided that ‘interest’ only meant annual interest

Question 8

What is Harrow LBC v Shah and Shah, and what does it apply to?

Answer 8

• Intrinsic aids
• defendants charged under s 13(1)(c) of the National Lottery Act 1993
• This subsection doesn’t include any words indicating either that mens rea (intention) is required or not, nor does it contain any provision for a defence of ‘due diligence’
• However, another subsection, s 13 (1)(a) clearly allows a defence of ‘due diligence’
• the inclusion of a ‘due diligence’ defence in (1)(a) of s 13 but not in the section under which the defendant were charged, was an important point in the Divisional Court coming to the decision that s 13 (1)(c) was an offence of strict liability

Question 9

what is Mendoza v Ghaidan and where does it apply?

Answer 9

• The effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on statutory interpretation
• Rent Act applied where a person who had tenancy of a property died
• it allowed unmarried partners to succeed to the tenancy as it stated that ‘a person living with the original tenant as there partner shall be treated as the spouse of the original tenant
• The question was where or not same sex partners had the same right, with a decision in the House of Lords made before the Human rights act ruled that they didn’t
• Court of Appeal held that the Rent Act had to be interpreted to conform to Human Rights which forbids gender discrimination

Question 10

What happened in Pepper v Hart and what area of law does it relate to?

Answer 10

-the HoL relaxed the rule and accepted that Hansard could be considered by Judges but in a limited way
-It can only be considered where the words of the Act are ambiguous
(Extrinsic aids)