Statutory Interpretation Flashcards
The literal rule
Judges give the words in the legislation their “ordinary, natural” meaning.
Judge must use the Oxford English Dictionary from the time the Act was made and apply the meaning of the word or phrase regardless of whether or not the case ends up with an absurd result.
(Cheeseman v DPP)
Advantages of the literal rule
Makes cases predictable as the same meaning is given every time a word is used in an Act. (LNER v Berrimen) anyone widow whose husband was killed oiling or maintaining railway track now knows they will receive no compensation.
Disadvantages of the literal rule
Rigidity – judges have no discretion so if a bad precedent or absurd results are made in a case then judges cannot provide justice in individual cases.
The golden rule
Used only if the literal rule creates an absurd or unjust result.
1. Modify natural meaning (wide approach)
2. OR choose between different meanings (narrow approach)
Narrow approach golden rule
(R v Allen) - “shall marry” was interpreted using the alternative OED of the time to mean “shall go through a marriage ceremony”, Allen was guilty of bigamy. The court chose between possible meanings using the Golden rule. If the literal rule had been used the absurd result would have been that the offence of bigamy could not be committed as “marry” is literally interpreted as being legally married. As no one can be legally married to more than one person at once this interpretation would mean no one could commit the offence.
Wider approach in golden rule
Where there is no alternative meaning of a word but the literal interpretation produces an unfair or absurd result the judge can modify the meaning.
(Adler v George) - D’s broke into Air force base to protest against the keeping of nuclear weapons. They were arrested inside a building. Here the meaning of the words “in the vicinity of” was modified to mean “within” in order to avoid an absurdity of the literal rule. The golden rule enabled a verdict of guilty for obstruction of a member of the armed forces on an air force base. If the literal rule would have been used “vicinity” would not be interpreted to include inside a building as its literal meaning is around the building only.
Advantage of the golden rule
Include fewer absurd and unjust results being made. So in the case of Allen the literal meaning of “marry would have created the absurdity that no one could actually be charged with the offence of Bigamy.
Disadvantage of the golden rule
It gives too much power to judges and is undemocratic nature. Particularly with the wide approach judges are able to effectively substitute meanings of words that may not be what parliament intended at the time the act was created.
The mischief rule
The rule looks at the problem (the gap) the Act was trying to solve when it was first made and then interprets the words of the Act to solve the problem related to the case.
Four factors to consider:
1. What was the old law before the Act?
2. What was the problem with the old law before the Act?
3. What was Parliaments intention in making the Act?
4. Interpret the Act to ensure it meets Parliament’s intentions in the current case.
Case using the mischief rule
(Smith v Hughes) - prostitute was calling from the balcony of a private house to men in the street below. If offence to solicit “in a street” was interpreted literally the defendant would have been found not guilty. Interpreted this phrase in the light of the Act’s clear intention to allow men to walk freely down the street without proposition — finding the prostitute’s actions to fall within this “mischief’ Parliament intended to stop; hence to be guilty of the offence -using the mischief rule. Key to interpreting “in a street” was in relation to where the men were, as long as the men were in the street when solicited by a prostitute, where the prostitute was was largely irrelevant as this is the problem parliament wanted to resolve in the Act.
Advantage of mischief rule
Avoids the inappropriate outcomes of literal rule by focusing on common sense approaches to the overall meaning of words in an act rather than their strict and sometimes absurd interpretations.
Disadvantage of mischief rule
For example it is seen as a backward looking approach that only allows judges to solve parliaments problem at the time the act was made, even though the case may be many years later when society has changed significantly.
The purposive approach
Judges look at the positive reasons parliament created the legislation and interpret the words to bring about that purpose.
(R v Registrar General) - criminally insane and had killed twice was adopted as a baby. In spite of the clear and seemingly absolute right to his birth records provided by the Adoption Act 1976 he was denied access to them on grounds of public policy. Parliament could not have intended to put the natural mother at risk. The positive purpose of the Act was to create closer family relationships.
Advantages of the purposive approach
It is a flexible approach which allows judges to develop the law in with Parliaments intentions.
Disadvantages of the purposive approach
Judges are given too much power to develop the law and usurping (without legal authority) the power of Parliament.
