statutory interpretation Flashcards
what is the need for statutory interpretation?
most statutes are very clear and specific however judges still need to use statutory interpretation to help them interpret the law properly…
a broad term-
may be words designed to cover several possibilities e.g. in the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 ‘any dog of the type known as the pit bull terrier’.
ambiguity-
a word has two or more meanings; it may not be clear which meaning should be used
a drafting error-
the draftsman who prepared the original bill may have made an error which has not been noticed by parliament or where the bill was amended several times while going through parliament
new developments-
new technology may mean that an old act of parliament does not apparently cover present-day situations
changes in the use of language-
the meaning of words can change over the years- Cheeseman v DPP
what is statutory interpretation
- the process of interpreting statutes (acts of parliament) by judges
the literal rule
when the law is taken word for word how it is written
- the words in a statute are given their ordinary and natural meaning.
- they will be read literally and do not need to be analysed further for different meanings, disregarding the plain words of the legislation
- an example of a plain reading resulting in a harsh result is the Berriman case (1956)
the golden rule
- used to prevent inconsistency and absurdity when interpreting an act literally.
- it can be applied narrowly or widely
- narrow approach-
when a word has several meanings so the judge uses the one best fit for the situation
-the court ‘can only choose between the possible meanings of the word’ i.e, if one meaning is apparent that meaning must be adopted
- Adler v George- “In the vicinity”
- wider approach-
when the judge alters or changes parts of the law to reach the fairest outcome - the courts can modify the words to avoid a problem, for instance, where there is an obvious and clear meaning but this meaning would lead to an absurd result
- Re Sigsworth- next of kin would not inherit the estate where they had killed the deceased
the mischief rule
- when the court looks at the reason at why the law was made and what ‘mischief it was trying to solve’
- will be used when there is ambiguity
- laid down in the landmark Heydon’s case in 1584
- basically identify the reason why (the mischief) parliament originally made this law. what were they trying to stop or achieve
the purposive approach (judges discretion)
- judges have the discretion to apply any of these rules of statutory interpretation as they deem appropriate
- provides judges with the ability to interpret legislation in the best way possible to achieve the result as intended by parliament when it was enacted
- reduces the risk of statutes being interpreted in a way that contradicts other legislation
intrinsic aids to interpretation
- example case: harrow london borough council v shah
- preamble: sets out the parliaments intentions
- long titles and short titles- brief descriptions of the statute in order to create clarity
extrinsic aids to interpretation
dictionaries- helping with word meanings
Hansard- official record of everything said in parliament
the impact of European Union Law on statutory interpretation
- previously…when the law being interpreted is actually based on EU law, the courts must follow the strict procedure to make sure that it is interpreted in line with EU law
- this strict requirement no longer applies since brexit
impact of of Human Rights Act 1998 on statutory interpretation
- legislation must be read and given in a way which is compatible with the European convention on human rights
- this does not include areas where human rights are not involved
example of the purposive approach being used
r v registrar-general, ex parte smith
- purposive approach - judicial consideration to the effect of their interpretation. the applicant in this case was refused a copy of his birth certificate because he was likely to murder his mother.
the judge said:
- clearly in this case, it would be absurd for a court to insist on implementing the clear words used by parliament without having any thought to the consequence
3 rules of language
- ejusdem generis:
general words must be related to the specific ones - expresso unius:
the inclusion of the one is the exclusion to the other - noscitur a sociis:
where the words are interpreted in the context of the other words in the sentence
advantages of hansard
- available for everybody to consult
- online
- can clear up what the original intent was in records of the bill’s discussion in parliament
disadvantages of hansard
- statements made in the debate may not be clear
- lawyers can spend a long time reading back over debates. this costs a lot of money
using reports by law reform agencies (with + and -)
- the law commission regularly publishes reports where they highlight gaps or anomalies in the law
- advantages:
problems in the current law are identified and in many cases, a draft bill is included as a suggested alternative
-disadvantages:
law commission reports are only available for limited areas of law. the other problem is any of the proposals or draft bills might have been rejected by government so that parliaments intention differs from the report
