Statutory Interpretation Flashcards
What is statutory interpretation?
Statutory interpretation is about judges making sense of Acts of Parliament and delegated legislation and deciding what the words used in them mean.
The role of the judges is to interpret and apply the law that Parliament has passed because Parliament is the supreme law making body.
What is the need for statutory interpretation?
- A BOARD TERM
E.G. “type” in Dangerous Dogs Act
-DRAFTING ERROR
Made when writing the original Bill
- AMBIGUITY
If a word has two or more meanings
R v Allen - ‘‘marry’’ means to go through a marriage ceremony
-CHANGES IN THE USE OF LANGUAGE
The meaning of words might change
E.G. The meaning of ‘‘passenger’’ in Cheeseman v DPP
-NEW DEVELOPMENTS
E.G. In technology.
In RCN V DHSS medical practitioner now includes nurses
What are the 6 challenges of interpreting statutes?
- It can be difficult to identify Parliaments intention
- Sometimes words are left out as they are thought to be implied.
- Broad terms are often used
- Error in drafting can be made
- Sometimes new situations arise that were unforeseen
- The meaning of words can change over time.
What is the literal rule?
The judge reads the statue as a whole, puts the words in context, and gives them their ordinary meaning.
- Lord Esher “if the words of an Act are clear, you must follow them, even though they lead to a manifest absurdity.
Examples of cases Literal rule?
Whiteley v Chappell- The Poor Amendment Act made it an offence to “impersonate any person entitled to vote.” The defendant cast his vote in the name of a dead person. D was found not guilty of the offence as, taking it literally, a dead person is not ‘entitled to vote.’
LNER V Berriman- A railway worker was killed whilst oiling the track and his widow claimed damages. The Fatal accidents Act allowed compensation on the death of those relaying or repairing the track. Taking those words literally it was decided that oiling was not relaying or repairing the track but rather was maintenance of it so the widow’s claim failed.
What are the general rules of the literal rule?
- The literal rule of statutory interpretation should be the first rule applied by judges
- Requires the judge to give the words of the statute their natural ordinary or dictionary meaning.
- Should be applied without the judge seeking to put a gloss on the words or seek to make sense of the statute
- This is the case even if it appears to be contrary to the rules of Parliament
- This may lead to unexpected results that were not the intention of Parliament.
Why is following Parliament’s exact words and advantage of the literal rule?
The literal rule follows parliaments exact words. This is appropriate because Parliament is the supreme law making body. Therefore it is right that judges should apply the law exactly as it is written as this avoids unelected judges making the law. This upholds the separation of powers as the role of the judges is to apply the law and the role of Parliament is to make it.
Why is creating certainty in the law an advantage of the literal rule?
The literal rile creates certainty in the law because if it is used we know that the judges will always apply the ordinary meaning of the word in context. This is an advantage because it allows lawyers to advice their clients with accuracy and for cases to be settled where appropriate. This approach therefore agrees with the rule of law which states that the law should be ascertainable
Why is consistent outcomes an advantage of the literal rule?
The literal rule leads to consistent outcomes as like cases will be treated alike if the law is interpreted in the same way. This is an advantage because it means people are being treated in a fair and just way. Furthermore, this agrees with the rule of law which states that we are all equal before the law.
Why is the literal rule assuming that legislation is drafted perfectly a disadvantage?
The literal rule assumes that legislation is drafted perfectly without any mistakes this is a disadvantage because it means that if an act is poorly drafted or contains errors judges will lack the necessary flexibility to arrive at a correct decision. Furthermore this can lead to absurd outcomes such as in Whiteley and Chappell
Why is the literal rule leading to unjust outcomes a disadvantage?
The Literal Rule can lead to unjust outcomes if the literal meaning of the words are applied regardless of the consequences. This is problematic because it leads to outcomes such as the one in LNER v Berriman in which a workman’s widow was denied compensation for her husbands death because his activity did not fall within a literal interpretation of ‘‘relaying or repairing.’’ In this way the literal rule can be said to prioritise certainty and predictability over fairness.
Why is the literal rule not taking into account the facts that words have more than one meaning an disadvantage?
The literal rule does not take into account the fact that words have more than one meaning and that the Act may be unclear as a result.This is a problem because the judges may not be able to identify which ‘’ ordinary meaning’’ of the word to choose. For example the word ‘‘type’’ in the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 was difficult to interpret. This creates uncertainty in the law, which is contrary to the requirement of the rule of law for ascertainable rules.
