Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

A-Level Law > Statutory Interpretation > Flashcards

Statutory Interpretation Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

How might a Statute be unclear?

A

-Using broad terms
-Ambiguity
-Drafting errors
-New inventions/technology
-Changes in the use of language

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What did Lord Esher say the literal rule meant?

A

If the words of an Act are clear, you must follow them even if they lead to a manifest absurdity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What do judges use to find the literal meaning of statutes?

A

The dictionary from the date of the Act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

LITERAL RULE
Which act was being interpreted in LNER v Berriman?

A

Fatal Accidents Act 1846.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

LITERAL RULE
Which phrase in LNER v Berriman was being interpreted?

A

‘relaying and repairing’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

LITERAL RULE
What interpretation was given in LNER v Berriman and therefore what was the outcome?

A

Mr Berriman had been maintaining the track which did not count as relaying or repairing. Therefore the railway company didn’t have to provide a lookout and did not have to pay Mrs Berriman any compensation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

LITERAL RULE
Which act was being interpreted in DPP v Cheeseman?

A

Town and Police Clauses Act 1847.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

LITERAL RULE
Which phrase in DPP v Cheeseman was being interpreted?

A

‘passengers’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

LITERAL RULE
What interpretation was given in DPP v Cheeseman and therefore what was the outcome?

A

The police did not count as passengers as they were stationed in the bathroom, not passing by it when D was masturbating. Therefore D was found not guilty.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are the advantages of the literal rule?

A

-Provides certainty within the law as acts will always have the same meaning which keeps the law fair and consistent.

-Saves judges’ time as they simply have to look up the dictionary meaning of the words and don’t need to hear complicated arguments in court- swift justice.

-Respects Parliamentary supremacy as it follows Parliament’s exact words which is good because it is Parliament’s job not a judge’s to make the law.

-Respects separation of powers as judges are merely interpreting the law and therefore doing their constitutional role.

-Makes laws easier to understand so they are more likely to be followed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are the disadvantages of the literal rule?

A

-Can lead to absurdity as bad decisions can be made due to technicalities which can prevent justice.

-Doesn’t apply to words with multiple meanings, or ambiguity and judges may disagree on the literal meaning making it difficult to apply the literal rule.

-Assumes perfection in drafting and Parliament’s intention may not be fulfilled due to an error in the Act.

-Doesn’t allow for judicial creativity which means the law may be outdated and Parliament has to spend time updating old laws.

-Changes in the use of language may make it hard for the general public to understand laws if they are outdated as the literal meaning might be unclear so they might not be followed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is the golden rule?

A

A modification or extension of the literal rule used to avoid an absurdity if the literal meaning was used.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What did Lord Reid say the narrow approach meant?

A

If there is more than one meaning of a word, the court can choose the word with the most appropriate meaning.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How does the broad approach work?

A

The courts can modify the words of a statute to avoid an absurd result.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

GOLDEN RULE (NARROW)
Which act was being interpreted in R v Allen?

A

Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

GOLDEN RULE (NARROW)
Which phrase in R v Allen was being interpreted?

A

‘marry’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

GOLDEN RULE (NARROW)
What interpretation was given in R v Allen and therefore what was the outcome?

A

Marry could mean either to legally marry or to go through a marriage ceremony. The court chose the second meaning to find D guilty of bigamy. If they had chosen the first meaning then bigamy would have been impossible as bigamy prevented a person being able to legally marry 2 people which is not what Parliament intended.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

GOLDEN RULE (BROAD)
Which act was being interpreted in Re Sigsworth?

A

Administration of Estates Act 1925.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

GOLDEN RULE (BROAD)
Which phrase in Re Sigsworth was being interpreted?

A

‘issue’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

GOLDEN RULE (BROAD)
What interpretation was given in Re Sigsworth and therefore what was the outcome?

A

Issue was clear but the court modified the Statute by adding ‘but not where the issue has murdered the deceased’ so Re Sigsworth did not get his mother’s inheritance. This was because Parliament clearly did not intend for a murderer to benefit from their crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What are the advantages of the golden rule?

A

-Avoids absurdity as judges can change the word of a statute to make the words and meanings make sense in the circumstances.

-Puts Parliament’s intention into practice even when the wording of a statute wasn’t worded in a way that would do so.

-Applies to words with multiple meanings which fixes this problem with the literal rule.

-Allows for judicial creativity which saves Parliament’s time as they don’t have to keep updating old laws.

-Drafting errors or loopholes like in R v Allen can be corrected.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What are the disadvantages of the golden rule?

A

-Creates uncertainty in the law as judges may disagree on when or how to change the words in an act.

-Goes against Parliamentary supremacy and separation of powers as it shouldn’t be judges who are changing the laws.

-Narrow approach is inflexible so judges may not be able to avoid the absurdity.

-Only works when the outcome from literal rule would be absurd- unfair outcomes can’t use the golden rule.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

How does the mischief rule work?

A

It allows judges to consider what mischief Parliament was trying to stop when it passed the Statute rather than simply concentrating on the word of the Statute.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What are 2 of the 4 rules that Heydon’s case decided must be asked when using the mischief rule?

A

What was the common law before the Act was made?
What was the mischief for which the common law did not provide?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

MISCHIEF RULE
Which act was being interpreted in Smith v Hughes?

A

Street Offences Act 1959.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

MISCHIEF RULE
Which phrase in Smith v Hughes was being interpreted?

A

‘in a street or public place’

27
Q

MISCHIEF RULE
What interpretation was given in Smith v Hughes and therefore what was the outcome?

A

It did not matter that D’s (prostitutes) were on balconies and in doorways, they were doing the mischief that the Act was trying to prevent, harassing passers by, and were therefore found guilty.

28
Q

MISCHIEF RULE
Which act was being interpreted in RCN v DHSS?

A

Abortion Act 1967.

29
Q

MISCHIEF RULE
Which phrase in RCN v DHSS was being interpreted?

A

‘registered medical practitioner’

30
Q

MISCHIEF RULE
What interpretation was given in RCN v DHSS and therefore what was the outcome?

A

There had been medical developments so nurses could reasonably help with procedures. Even though nurses were not classified as registered medical practitioners, it was decided that they could assist in abortions as the Act was trying to prevent dangerous backstreet abortions and allowing nurses to assist would result in more safe abortions taking place.

31
Q

What are the advantages of the mischief rule?

A

-Avoids absurdity as judges can ignore strict wording which means justice will be served.

-Puts Parliament’s intention into practice as judges are fixing the problem Parliament
wanted to solve so it ensures the law works as intended.

-Creates flexibility in the law so judges can consider the circumstances and changes in society when coming to a decision.

-Allows for judicial creativity which saves Parliament’s time.

-Allows for drafting errors and unintended loopholes so a fair outcome can be reached.

32
Q

What are the disadvantages of the mischief rule?

A

-Creates uncertainty in the law as judges may disagree what mischief it was that Parliament wanted to stop.

-Goes against Parliamentary supremacy and separation of powers as judges aren’t simply interpreting the law.

-Limited in fixing one problem at a time as they can only use to law to fill the gap in the old law rather than actually fulfill Parliament’s intention.

-Judges may apply their own prejudices and opinions to a case when they haven’t been elected democratically so shouldn’t be able to do this.

33
Q

How does the purposive approach work?

A

Looks at what Parliament intended/aimed to achieve when passing the Statute. Judges then interpret the Act to achieve this aim.

34
Q

What did Viscount Simonds say the purposive approach was?

A

A naked usurpation of the legislative function under the thin guide of interpretation’. (A usurpation of Parliament’s power and role as law makers).

35
Q

What did Lord Denning say about the purposive approach?

A

‘We sit here to find out the intention of Parliament, and we do that better by filling in the gaps than by making a nonsense out of literal meanings’.

36
Q

PURPOSIVE APPROACH
Which act was being interpreted in Jones v Tower Boot Co?

A

Race Relations Act 1976.

37
Q

PURPOSIVE APPROACH
Which phrase in Jones v Tower Boot Co was being interpreted?

A

‘in the course of employment’

38
Q

PURPOSIVE APPROACH
What interpretation was given in Jones v Tower Boot Co and therefore what was the outcome?

A

Even though the racist abuse by the employees were technically not in the course of employment, the employer was found liable as Parliament intended to prevent discrimination, promote racial equality and to educate people. Finding a big company like TBC liable would achieve this aim as other employers would educate their employees.

39
Q

PURPOSIVE APPROACH
Which act was being interpreted in R v RG ex parte Smith?

A

Adoption Act 1976.

40
Q

PURPOSIVE APPROACH
Which phrase in R v RG ex parte Smith was being interpreted?

A

‘shall supply’

41
Q

PURPOSIVE APPROACH
What interpretation was given in R v RG ex parte Smith and therefore what was the outcome?

A

Even though the literal meaning gave no discretion, the court decided that Parliament would never have intended to promote serious crime like murder or to put someone at risk and so they decided that RG didn’t have to give D his birth certificate as he had previously murdered 2 people, 1 of whom he thought was his mother.

42
Q

What are the advantages of the purposive approach?

A

-Avoids absurdity as judges can look past strict literal meanings to achieve justice.

-Puts Parliament’s intention into practice which is good as Parliament’s intentions should reflect what society wants.

-Promotes flexibility in the law so judges aren’t forced into bad decisions and can consider the circumstances of the case.

-Allows for judicial creativity which saves Parliament’s time so more important laws can be passed quickly by Parliament.

-Used commonly in the EU so laws made by ECHR can be used in the UK as literal meanings won’t work for different courts speaking different languages.

43
Q

What are the disadvantages of the purposive approach?

A

-Creates uncertainty in the law as judges may come to different conclusions when deciding Parliament’s purpose.

-Goes against Parliamentary supremacy and separation of powers as judges are changing the law which is not their job.

-Makes judges too powerful which is a problem as they are not elected so don’t necessarily reflect what society wants.

-Can be time consuming to find out
Parliament’s intention- justice is slow.

44
Q

What is one of the main reasons why the purposive approach is used in the UK?

A

Because it is used by the EU due to language barriers meaning the literal rule would be ineffective when using EU or ECHR law.

45
Q

What are intrinsic aids?

A

Help that is found inside the statute which the judge is interpreting. e.g. short title, definition sections, marginal notes.

46
Q

What are extrinsic aids?

A

Help that is found outside the statute which the judge is interpreting. e.g. Oxford English dictionary from the date of the statute, Hansard, law reform reports, Interpretation Act.

47
Q

Why is the date included in a short title?

A

So judges can look up definitions of words in the Act in the Oxford English dictionary from the date of the Act.

48
Q

What are definition sections?

A

A section that contains specific literal meanings of the words in a statute, often where they would otherwise be ambiguous. The definitions are clear, relevant and specific to the Act.

49
Q

What are marginal notes and who adds them?

A

Guidance and summaries to help judges interpret Acts effectively written by the Parliamentary Counsel. They don’t have to be followed but generally the guidance provided is useful for judges.

50
Q

What is Hansard and why is it useful?

A

A word for word record of everything that was said in Parliament when debating new statutes. Useful for mischief rule and purposive approach as judges can understand what it was that Parliament wanted to prevent or achieve.

51
Q

What did Lord Denning say when the HoL didn’t allow the use of Hansard in Davis v Johnson?

A

It meant judges must ‘grope about in the dark for a meaning of an Act without switching on the light’.

52
Q

What were the 3 circumstances in which the use of Hansard was allowed in Pepper v Hart?

A

-The words of an Act are ambiguous and are likely to lead to an absurdity.

-There is a statement in Hansard relating to the issue in question.

-The statement would clear up the ambiguity

53
Q

Why was Lord Mackay against using Hansard?

A

It would cost a lot of money and time to use Hansard.

54
Q

What was Lord Bridge’s compromise on the use of Hansard and why was it silly?

A

Judges could only use Hansard if it will help them on a particular issue but they won’t know if Hansard will help until they look at it.

55
Q

Which case said that official reports from the Law Commission could be used to discover the mischief that Parliament wanted to stop?

A

Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke.

56
Q

Which case used law reform reports to find male prostitutes not guilty under the Street Offences Act?

A

DPP v Bull.

57
Q

What does the Interpretation Act 1978 say?

A

The act contains meanings of words which will be used in many statutes. Section 6 says that unless otherwise stated, all words in the singular form will also include the plural and use of the word ‘he’ will also refer to and include she or they.

58
Q

Which case said that ‘land’ includes buildings as D glued himself to a door where his feet were not touching the ground?

A

DPP v Chivers

59
Q

What did the Marleasing case show?

A

While the UK was in the EU, UK judges must interpret UK Acts so they respect the wording and purpose of EU laws- made clear by the European Court of Justice.

60
Q

What does section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 say?

A

UK judges have to interpret and give effect to legislation so that is compatible with the ECHR, as far as it is possible to do so.

61
Q

What happened in the Mendoza v Ghaidan case?

A

The Rent Act said that tenancies could go to unmarried spouses if they were living ‘as husband or wife’. Due to same sex marriage not being legal at the time, Mendoza was not included in the Act when his male partner died. He claimed this was decimating against him based on his gender. The court decided that it would breach human rights (as set out by the ECHR) to not allow Mendoza to become the tenant, and so interpreted the Act to allow it to apply to same sex couples as well.

62
Q

What does section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 say?

A

When it is not possible to interpret UK law to comply with EHCR law, judges must make a ‘declaration of incompatibility’. This asks Parliament to review the Act but doesn’t do anything to the Act itself. Parliament can then choose whether they want to change the law or not.

63
Q

How was a definition section used in Oxford v Moss?

A

Section 4 of the Theft Act 1968 was used to give a definition of property and so it was determined that information was not able to be stolen.

64
Q

What case said that marginal notes don’t have to be used when interpreting an Act (although they are generally reliable)?

A

Montilla

A-Level Law (43 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions