Chapter 5- Statutory interpretation Flashcards
What is statutory interpretation
This occurs at times when the COA or Supreme Court has to interpret a particular law for it to give clarity
what are the reasons for statutory interpretation
1)A broad term may be used
2)Drafting errors
3)Ambiguity
4)New development
5)Changes in Language
What are the 3 common law rules of interpretation
1- The literal rule
2-The golden rule
3-The mischief rule
The literal rule:
This is when judges give the ordinary and plain meaning of words in the judgements
example case of the literal rule
Fisher V Bell - 1961
a flick knife was displayed in a shop as an offer however the weapons Act so it as an offence. The judge decided to take ‘offer’ as an ‘invitation to treat’
Evaluate the literal rule
2 strengths
3 weaknesses
+Gives certainty to the law as these were the exact word written in the judgement
+Follows the exact words that parliament has used
-Some words may have more than one meaning
-Can lead to unfair decisions
-assumes every Act is perfectly drafted.
The golden rule:
This is an interpretation of the literal rule however does not interpret to absurd results
The two ways of how the golden rule is applied and give a case example
Narrow application-The judge choses between the possible meanings of that word
e.g case R v Allan
Wider Application -Here when there is only one meaning, the judge can modify the statute to avoid the problem
E.g Re Sigsworth
Evaluate the Golden rule
2 strengths
2 weaknesses
+Gives respect to parliaments exact words except in limited situations
+Avoids absurd decisions to occur and instead leads to a sensible outcome
-It can be used in limited situations
-It is quite rare to do the golden rule
The mischief rule
It gave more liberty to judges when interpreting laws compared to the other two by questioning;
>What was the common law back then
>What was the mischief that the law tried to cover
>What was parliament main intention/ remedy
>What was the true reason of the remedy
Give an example case of the Mischief rule
-Elliot V Grey
A car was on a road with a missing battery and suspended jacks. This affected the Roads Traffic Act and was charged with using an uninsured vehicle on the road, however argued that the vehicle was not driving. The judge used the mischief rule and concluded that he had still made an offence as it doesn’t matter whether it was driving or not, it was still on the road.
Evaluate the mischief rule
2 strengths
2 weaknesses
+It gives more liberty and flexibility allowing judges to look at the gap the Act was covering
+It achieves parliaments intention
-Can lead to uncertainty
-leads to ‘judicial law making’ rather than parliamentary law making
What does the purposive approach do?
It tries to find the MAIN intention of the law being created
What were Lord Denning’s views on purposive approach
-rather than destructive analysis we make sense of the enactment by filling in the gaps
How was Lord Denning’s views criticised
Lord Scarman said that instead of society being led by parliaments intentions it should be led by parliaments enactment as it is not under the historic principles of common law
