Literal Rule A03 Flashcards
What are the 4 WDPS for the literal rule
-Complexity
-Absurdity
+Upholds separation of powers
+Consistency and certainty
-P1: ignores the limitations and complexity of the english language
doesn’t accommodate for evolving language and dual meanings = problematic
-DP1: OAPA 1961 - antiquated language..
applied incorrectly, ‘bodily’ suggesting physical harm yet including psychological harm = unclear
+WDP1: establishes clarity and predictability
makes stat interpretation easier = fairer outcome
-P2: Often leads to absurd results
outcomes contrary to the legislature’s intent or the policy underlying the statute = ineffective
-DP2: Fisher v Bell
acquitted the df under the strict literal interpretation of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act - defeats the intention of the statute = dfs avoiding accountability
+WDP2: Highlights parliamentary errors
upholds SoP as parliament can reform the law encouraging draft precision in the future
+P3: Upholds and respects parliamentary sovereignty
increases trust in parliament’s precise wording
+DP3: Upholds SoP as judges have a minimal role in the legislation process
ensures fairness and powers being equally distributed
-WDP3: Assumes perfection from Parliament with foresight of all possible issues when writing the legislation
very difficult for the statute to be applied effectively
+P4: creates certainty in the application of the law
consistency and uniformity
+DP4: clarity + predictability
easier for lawyers to advise = fair application of the law
-WDP4: unjust results (case)
LNER v Berriman couldn’t receive compensation for her husbands death due to minute differences in the wording - doesn’t accommodate for the reality of circumstantial differences = morally unjust
