Statuatory Interpretation Flashcards
Statutory interpretation is needed because of problems such as:
- Failure of legislation to cover a specific point
- a broad term
- ambiguity
- drafting errors
- new technological developments
What is the literal rule
Taking the plain grammatical meaning of the Act
e.g. Whiteley v Chappell (1858)
What is the golden rule?
Allows modification of words where the literal rule would lead to absurdity, repugnance or inconsistency
e.g. Adler v George (1964)
What is the mischief rule and what are the four points the court should consider?
Considers the ‘mischief’ or gap in the old law and interprets the Act in such a way that the gap is covered (Heydon’s case 1584)
- What was the common law before the Act?
- What was the mischief for which the common law didn’t provide?
- What was the remedy by the Parliament?
- What was the true reason of the remedy?
e.g. Smith v Hughes (1960)
What is the purposive approach in statutory interpretation?
The courts look to see what is the purpose of the law passed by parliament
e.g. R v Registrar-General (1990)
A v D of the literal rule *
A: - follows wording of parliament
- prevents unelected judge making law
- makes law more certain
- easier to predict the judges’ interpretation
D: - not all acts are perfectly drafted (Whiteley v Chappell)
- some words have more than just one meaning (Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 [‘type’])
- can lead to unjust decisions (Berriman 1946)
A v D of the Golden rule *
A: - respects the words of parliament
- allows the judge to choose the most sensible meaning
- avoids the worst problems of the literal rule
(Re Sigsworth - Golden rule led to a just decision)
D: - can only be used in limited situations
- not possible to predict when courts will use it
- it is a ‘feeble parachute’ (Zander) - it can’t do very much
- It is a subjective decision that gives the judge too much discretion - what is ‘absurd’?
A v D of the mischief rule *
A: - deals with the mischief parliament was trying to deal with (Smith v Hughes)
- fills in the gap in the law
- produces a ‘just’ result
D: - risk of judicial law making (subjective like in Smith v Hughes)
- not as wide as the purposive approach
- limited to looking back at the old law
- can make the law uncertain
A v D of the purposive approach *
A: - leads to justice in individual cases
- allows for new developments in technology ( R v Secretary of State)
- avoids absurd decisions
D: - difficult to find parliament’s intention
- allows judges to make law (subjective)
- leads to uncertainty in the law
What is the ‘ejusdem generis’ rule of language in Acts?
General words which follow a list are limited to the same kind
e.g. ‘stone, concrete, slag or other similar material’ in Hobbs v Robertson Ltd stated that brick wasn’t an ‘other similar material’
What is the ‘expressio unius’ rule of language in Acts?
The express mention of one thing excludes others
e.g. Tempest v Kilner didn’t have a general word after the list so it only meant the words in the list and nothing else
What is the ‘noscitur a sociis’ rule of language in Acts?
A thing is known by the company it keeps
e.g. Inland Revenue Commissioners v Fere: ‘interest’ on its own could have meant any interest but since after it said ‘other annual interest’ , the court decided that it was only ‘annual interest’ and nothing else
Intrinsic aids to statutory interpretation are…
…those in the Act and include:
The short title and preamble
Interpretation sections
Headings
Schedules
Extrinsic aids to statutory interpretation are…
…those not included in the act:
Previous Acts of Parliament The historical setting Earlier case law Dictionaries Hansard Law Commission reports International conventions
A v D of intrinsic aids *
A: -Some of these are put by parliament to make the law clearer to interpret
- In some statutes there are definitions of words (e.g. Theft Act 1968 ‘building’ applies to an ‘inhabited vehicle or vessel’ )
D: - not included in every statute (modern ones don’t have a long preamble)
- confusion when there is no definition (e.g. Theft Act 1968 had no definition for ‘dishonestly’)
- What is put by the printers doesn’t always accurately reflect parliament intention