Statutory Interpretation

Question 1

Narrow approach case

Answer 1

R v Allen
The wording of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 had to be given a different interpretation for the crime of bigamy, because the way it was written meant that the crime could never be committed.
The court used the golden rule and held that ‘marry’ meant ‘to go through a marriage ceremony

Question 2

Broad approach case

Question 3

Why use broad approach?

Answer 3

Where there is only one literal meaning of a word or phrase, but to apply it would cause an absurdity, then under the broad approach the court will modify this meaning to avoid absurdity.

Question 4

Broad approach case

Answer 4

ADLER V GEORGE

Court applied broad approach and applied the word ‘in’ to mean in the vicinity of and changed the meaning of the word.

Question 5

Mischief rule established in…

Answer 5

HEYDONS CASE

Question 6

When using mischief rule..

Answer 6

When using this rule, a judge should consider what the common law was BEFORE the Act was passed,

• what the problem was with that law
• what the remedy was that Parliament was trying to provide

Question 7

Purposive rule.

Answer 7

The purposive approach focuses on what Parliament intended when passing the new law.

Question 8

purposive approach case

Answer 8

Jones v Tower Boot Co: “In the course of employment” included racial harassment that happened at work even though it was not part of the work

Question 9

Problems with purposive approach

Answer 9

Leads to justice in individual cases BUT makes law less certain
Fills in the gaps in the law BUT leads to judicial law-making as opposed to democratic law-making

Question 10

Problems with broad rule

Answer 10

Broad approach covers more situations BUT it is difficult to discover the intention of Parliament

Question 11

Presumptions by judges when interpreting statutes

Answer 11

Presumptions - judges make certain assumptions about the intentions of Parliament, and require strong evidence to the contrary, such as:
does not intend to impose criminal liability
does not intend to take away fundamental rights
does not intend to exclude the courts from deciding disputes

Question 12

State the 3 rules of language

Answer 12

ejusdem generis
expressio unius est exclusio alterius
noscitur a socciis

Question 13

ejusdem generis is

Answer 13

where general words follow a list they are interpreted in the context of the list

Question 14

Ejusdem generis case

Answer 14

Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse (1899) – ‘house, office, room or other place for betting’ – “other place” interpreted as other indoor place

Question 15

expressio unius est exclusio alterius is

Answer 15

It means the expression of one excludes others

Question 16

expressio unius est exclusio alterius case

Answer 16

Tempest v Kilner (1846) statute concerned contracts in writing for ‘goods, wares and merchandise – ‘stocks and shares’ not mentioned in statute and so not covered

Question 17

noscitur a socciis is

Answer 17

noscitur a socciis –

ambiguous words or phrases can be clarified by referring to the context in which they are used /the words around em

Question 18

noscitur a socciis case

Answer 18

Muir v Keay (1875) – houses kept open for ‘public refreshment, resort and entertainment’ had to be licensed – court held ‘entertainment’ did not mean musical entertainment – so a café required a licence

Question 19

List some external aids

Answer 19

Dictionaries
Hansard
Official Reports

Question 20

A case for external aids

Answer 20

Hansard- Pepper V Hart said it could be used (whreas it couldnt in davis v johnson)

Question 21

List some internal aids

Answer 21

Long title

Preamble

Question 22

A case for internal aids

Answer 22

Long title-

Lord diplock mentioned the abortion act in (Black clawson) case