Rules Of Interpretation

Question 1

Literal rule

Answer 1

Judges give words their plan and grammatical meaning, apply the dictionary meaning even if absurd, shown in Cheesman v Dpp with passenger and in Lner v Berriman with oiling.

Question 2

Golden rule

Answer 2

Judges pick the least absurd meaning to avoid an unjust result, there are 2 approaches:

• narrow, word has two meanings but one is absurd so the court chooses between them , shown in Adler v George with in the vicinity
• wide, meaning of the word is ambiguous but to give it the literal meaning would be absurd, shown in Re Sigsworth with issue.

Question 3

Mischief rule

Answer 3

Judges have more discretion, they look at what the law was before the act to see what parl intended to fix, established in Haydens case with 4 criteria’s:
-common law before the act
- what problem did parl intend to fix
- what remedy was used
- true reason for the remedy
Shown in Smith v Hughes with in the street and Corkery v Carpenter with carriage.