statutory interpretation

Question 1

what are the 4 rules regarding statutory interpretation?

Answer 1

• literal rule
• golden rule
• mischief rule
• purposive approach

Question 2

what is the literal rule?

Answer 2

court gives words their plain, ordinary or literal meaning even if this produces an absurd result

defined in R v Judge of the City of London Court (1892) – Lord Esher

Question 3

what does the literal rule respect?

Answer 3

Parliamentary supremacy as it follows exactly what Parliament wrote and the exact meaning of the word without trying to change it.

Separation of powers as judges are not deciding what the law is or should be. They simply apply the literal meaning of the word and that is the end of it.

Question 4

cases displaying the literal rule

Answer 4

Cheeseman v DPP (1990)
London & North Eastern Railway Co v Berriman (1946)
Whitely v Chappell (1868)
Fisher v Bell (1961)

Question 5

Cheeseman v DPP (1990)

Answer 5

• Defendant was witnessed masturbating in a public toilet by two police officers.
• According to the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 they had to be passengers
• Court used a dictionary from 1847 to look at what the word ‘passengers’ meant – it meant ‘passers-by’
• Court held that as the police officers were stationed there, they were not ‘passengers’ in the literal sense of the word.

Question 6

London & North Eastern Railway Co v Berriman (1946)

Answer 6

• Railway worker killed whilst oiling points along a railway line
• Widow tried to claim compensation as there had been no look-out provided by the railway company.
• Fatal Accidents Act stated that a look-out had to be provided for men when they were “relaying or repairing” the railway line
• Court stated that as oiling was just maintaining the track and neither relaying or repairing it, Mrs Berriman was not entitled to compensation.

Question 7

Whitely v Chappell (1868)

Answer 7

• Defendant impersonated someone who had died to cast a second vote in an election
• Statute made it an offence to “impersonate any person entitled to vote”
• Court ruled that a dead person was not “entitled to vote” and therefore they acquitted the defendant.

Question 8

Fisher v Bell (1961)

Answer 8

• Defendant displayed a flick-knife in a store window contrary to offensive weapons legislation
• Law made it an offence to “offer for sale” a flick-knife
• Court ruled that under the law of contract, the defendant was actually only offering an “invitation to treat” whereby a customer would ask to purchase the flick-knife
• Therefore he wasn’t strictly or literally “offering for sale” the flick-knife

Question 9

what is the golden rule?

Answer 9

• This rule is simply an extension of the literal rule
• If by using the literal rule – the court produces an absurd result, then the court can interpret the word(s) differently to produce a more appropriate interpretation

Grey v Pearson (1857) – Lord Wensleydale

Question 10

what are the two approaches to the use of
the golden rule?

Answer 10

narrow and wide approach

Question 11

narrow approach

golden rule

Answer 11

If a word(s) has two or more possible meanings, the court can choose the most appropriate meaning between the options. If there is only one meaning then they should go with that regardless of whether it produces an absurd result

r v allen, adler v george

Question 12

wide approach

Answer 12

If the word(s) has only one possible meaning but this produces an absurd result, the court will choose a more appropriate meaning

re sigsworth

Question 13

what are the cases regarding golden rule?

Answer 13

• R v Allen (1872)
• Re Sigsworth (1935)
• Adler v George (1964)

Question 14

R v Allen (1872)

Answer 14

• Defendant was charged with the offence of bigamy.
• The statute stated that ‘whosoever being married shall marry any other person during the lifetime of the former husband or wife is guilty”
• Under a literal interpretation of this section the offence would be impossible to commit since civil law will not recognise a second marriage any attempt to marry in such circumstances would not be recognised as a valid marriage.
• Court therefore applied the golden rule and held that the word ‘marry’ should be interpreted as ‘to go through a marriage ceremony’.
• The defendant’s conviction was upheld.

Question 15

Re Sigsworth (1935)

Answer 15

• Son murdered own mother
• Mother hadn’t made a will so estate would normally go to the next of kin (him) as he is the “issue” under rules on inheritance
• no ambiguity in the act, and the term “issue” had no other interpretation other than the next of kin.
• The court did not want him to inherit the money so they used the golden rule and said the “issue” could not include those who had murdered the person they were to inherit from

wide approach

Question 16

Adler v George (1964)

Answer 16

• Defendant broke into a army/navy base.
• Charged with obstructing Her Majesty’s Forces “in the vicinity” of a prohibited place
• The problem was that he was in the prohibited place, not in the vicinity of a prohibited place
• Court ruled that “in the vicinity” actually meant “in or in the vicinity” of a prohibited place
• Defendant was found guilty

Question 17

what is the mischief rule?

Answer 17

Court considers the mischief that Parliament was trying to stop when they first passed the law and then try and interpret the word(s) to best give effect to stopping this mischief

definition comes from Heydon’s case (1584) - 4 points to consider
-What was the law before the making of the Act?
-What was the mischief they were trying to stop?
-What was the remedy proposed by Parliament?
-What was the true reason for that remedy?

Question 18

which cases illustrate the mischief rule?

Answer 18

• Corkery v Carpenter (1951)
• Smith v Hughes (1960)
• Royal College of Nursing v DHSS (1981)

Question 19

Corkery v Carpenter

Answer 19

Defendant was in charge of a bicycle whilst drunk

It was an offence to be drunk in charge of a “carriage”

Court had to decide what the word “carriage” meant so they looked at what the mischief was - drunks on the highway in charge of a form of transport

They then interpreted the word “carriage” with this mischief in mind and decided that a bicycle fell within the meaning of the word “carriage”

Defendant was found guilty

Question 20

Smith v Hughes

Answer 20

Defendant was a prostitute who was arrested after beckoning men into her property by waving through windows or from a balcony

The law criminalised soliciting “in a street or public place”

Under a literal definition of the phrase, the women were not “in a street or public place” - they were inside a property

Court considered the mischief the Act was trying to prevent - trying to stop prostitution and to clean up the streets.

The court therefore interpreted the phrase so as to find the defendants guilty

Question 21

Royal College of Nursing v DHSS

Answer 21

Wording of the Abortion act 1967 read that a pregnancy should be “terminated by a registered medical practitioner” only

By 1981 it had become common practice for nurses to carry out abortions rather than doctors

The literal meaning of a “registered medical practitioner” is a doctor

Royal College of Nursing put a case forward to determine the law and then advise nurses on whether to continue or stop carrying out abortions

Court considered the mischief of the Act - to decrease the number of illegal abortions and increase the hygiene and safety of abortions

As nurses were fulfilling these requirements they ruled that nurses fell within the definition of “registered medical practitioners”

Question 22

What is the purposive approach?

Answer 22

This rule goes beyond the mischief rule and the court tries to determine what Parliament was trying achieve.

Rather than considering the mischief Parliament was trying to stop they focus on the purpose of the Act

Question 23

which cases show the purposive approach?

Answer 23

• Jones v Tower Boot Company
• R v Registrar-General, ex parte Smith
• R (Quintavalle) v SOS for Health

Question 24

Jones v Tower Boot Company

Answer 24

• young black worker was discriminated against by his workmates
• Race Relations Act 1976 made it the responsibility of employers to deal with discrimination that fell within ‘the course of employment’
• Employer argued the discrimination fell outside the course of their employment and so they weren’t responsible
• According to the court, Parliament’s intention when enacting the Race Relations Act was to eliminate discrimination in the workplace
• They therefore said that whilst it fell outside the course of their employment, the employer should still have dealt with it
• The decision was awarded in favour of the defendant

Question 25

R v Registrar-General, ex parte Smith

Answer 25

A convicted murderer found out he was adopted whilst in prison

• The adoption Act 1967 allows anyone over the age of 18 to request the details of their birth parents
• Psychiatrists believed he may be hostile towards his natural mother and recommended he should not be provided with the information
• Court ruled that Parliament would never have intended to promote serious crime and so held that the defendant was not able to access the records

Question 26

R (Quintavelle) v SOS for Health

Answer 26

• Question came before the HoL as to whether a cloned embryo (using CNR technique) came within the definition of an “embryo” under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act
• The act defined an embryo as being where “fertilisation is complete”
• When the Act was passed in 1990, CNR was not invented
• CNR involves cloning the embryo so there is no fertilisation process
• The court ruled that the purpose of the Act was to cover all types of embryos and therefore CNR embryos were covered by the Act

Question 27

What are the rules of language?

Answer 27

• expressio unius exclusio alterius
• ejusdem generis
• noscitur a sociis

Question 28

Expression unius exclusio alterius

Answer 28

The express mention of one thing excludes others

Where there is a list of words which is not followed by general words, then the Act only applies to those items that are not on the list

• Tempest v Kilner

Question 29

Tempest v Kilner

Answer 29

The court had to decide whether the sale of some stocks and shares had to be evidenced in writing to comply with the Statue of Frauds (1677)

The Act required a contract for sale of ‘goods, wares and merchandise’ of more than £10 to be evidenced in writing

Since the lists ‘goods, wares and merchandise’ was not followed by any general words, it only applied to the specific items listed and stocks and shares were therefore not included

Question 30

Ejusdem generis

Answer 30

-of the same kind

Where there is a list of words followed by general words, then the general words are limited to the same kind of items as the specific words

• Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse

Question 31

Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse

Answer 31

The court had to decide whether an outdoor betting ring would be included under an offence charged as “keeping a house, office, room or other place for betting’

The general words “other place for betting” had to be the same type as the other specific things ‘house, office or room’

Because all of the specific things mentioned are indoor rooms, and the outdoor ring was an outside thing, the Act did not apply

Question 32

Noscitur a sociis

Answer 32

-a word is known by the company it keeps

The words must be looked at in context and interpreted accordingly; it
involves looking at other words in the same section or at other sections
in the Act.

Pengelly v Bell Punch Co. Ltd (1964)

Question 33

Pengelly v Bell Punch Co. Ltd (1964)

Answer 33

The court had to decide whether a floor used for storage came under
the Factories Act 1961, whereby ‘floors, steps, stairs, passageways and
gangways’ had to be kept free from obstruction.

The court held that as all the other words were used to indicate
passage, a floor used exclusively for storage did not fall within the Act

Question 34

what are the two aids of interpretaion?

Answer 34

• intrinsic aids
• extrinsic aids

Question 35

what are intrinsic aids?

Answer 35

Aids within the statute itself that can help make the meaning of a word(s) clearer

• judge can consider the long title, the short title and the preamble of any Act
• other useful internal aids are any headings before a group of sections, and any schedules attached to the Act
• marginal notes explain different sections, but these are not generally regarded as giving parliament’s intention as they will have been inserted after parliamentary debates and are only helpful comments put in by the printer

Question 36

what are extrinsic aids?

Answer 36

Aids found outside of the Act itself that can help make the meaning of a word(s) clearer

• Dictionaries of the time of the Act – one used in Cheeseman v DPP to
  determine the meaning of the word “passengers”
• Hansard – official report of what is said during debates in Parliament.
  Until 1992, Hansard was not allowed to be used by judges, however the case of Pepper v Hart changed this.

Textbooks and academic journals

Law Commission Reports

Case law from other countries – used in R v Bentham (USA gun laws)