Statutory Interpretation Flashcards
The Literal Rule (+cases)
The words in an Act are given their ordinary, dictionary meaning.
e.g. Whiteley v Chappell (absurd result)
e.g. LNER v Berriman (harsh result)
Advantages of the literal rule
Democratic
Straightforward to apply
Law is more certain as interpreted exactly as written
Excludes the possibility of judges being biased
Disadvantaged of the literal rule
Often leads to harsh and absurd outcomes
Judge’s interpretation of a word may be different to others
Assumes that every Act is perfectly drafted
Can create loopholes in the law
The Golden Rule (+cases)
Narrow: J chooses the meaning of an ambiguous word
Wide: Where a word with a clear meaning would lead to an absurd result
e.g. Adler v George (narrow)
e.g. R v Allen (narrow)
e.g. Re Sigsworth (wide)
Advantages of the golden rule
Avoids absurd results-acts as an escape route
Allows J to choose most sensible outcomes
Limited use avoids J having too much power
Still respects the words of Parliament
Disadvantages of the golden rule
Rarely used
Subjective: gives J too much discretion
Unpredictable when J will use it
The Mischief Rule (+cases)
J looks at the gap in the law before the Act was passed and interprets the words to cover the gap and deal with the mischief
e.g. Smith v Hughes
e.g. Royal College of Nursing v DHSS
Advantages of the mischief rule
Fulfills the purpose of the Act
More likely to produce a just result
J tries to interpret the law in the way Parliament meant
Disadvantages of the mischief rule
Risks judicial law making
Leads to uncertainty in the law
Not as wide as the purposive approach
Impossible to know when J will use so becomes difficult for legal professionals to advise their clients
The Purposive Approach (+cases)
The court will look at the purpose for the legislation before interpreting the words
e.g. Jones v Tower Boot Company
e.g. Quintavelle
Advantages of the purposive approach
Fulfills the purpose of the Act
Leads to justice in individual cases
Useful for acommodating new technology
Gives Js more discretion than the literal rule
Disadvantages of the purposive approach
Js refuse to follow the clear words of Parliament
Difficult to discover Parl’s intentions
Leads to uncertainty in the law
Impossible to know when J will use so becomes difficult for legal professionals to advise their clients
LR: Whiteley v Chappell
D charged with impersonating someone who is ‘entiteld to vote’. He pretended to be someone who was on the voting register but had died. Conviction aquitted as the persona was dead so not ‘entitled to vote’
=absurd
LR: LNER v Berriman
Widow didn’t compensate from her husband’s death as he was killed maintaining the railway without lookout which must be provided when ‘repairing and relaying’ the railway. He was doing neither of these.
=harsh
GR: Re Sigsworth (wide)
D killed his mother. She left no will so naturally her estate would become his. Judge didn’t allow this at it would be unfair for D to benefit from his crime.
GR: R v Allen (narrow)
D charged with bigamy . This is literally impossible as a second marriage isn’t recognised. Golden rule was used to uphold conviction
GR: Adler v George (narrow)
D obstructed a member of the armed forces ‘in the vicinity’ of a prohibited palace. The defendant was actually in the prohibited place, rather than ‘in the vicinity’ of it, at the time of obstruction. Golden rule used to interpret ‘in the vicinity’ as actually inside. Conviction upheld,
MR: Smith v Hughes
Offence for prostitues to loiter in a street or public place. Ds were attracting attention from windows. Guilty as the mischief Parl was trying to fix was to eliminate prostitutes in public places.
MR: Royal College of Nursing v DHSS
Abortions could only be carried out by registerd medical practitioners. Questioned whether nurses were allowed to perform abortions. Ruled as lawful because the mischief Parl were trying to prevent was illegal, backstreet abortions
PA: Jones v Tower Boot Company
Mr Jones was verbally and physically abused by other employees. He claimed that the attack was racially motivated. CoA used the purposive approach to reverse the Employment Tribunal’s decison.
Quintavelle
Scientific advances meant that embryos could be cloned. HoL said that the Act supported this as Parl couldn’t have known of new technological advancements.
Intrinsic Aids
(within the Act itself)
Long and short title
Preamble (intro part of the statute)
Interpretation sections
Schedules
Marginal notes and headings
Extrinsic Aids
(beyong the Act)
Dictionary
Hansard (report of Parl’s debates)
Royal Commissions or law reform body reports
Case law
Interpretation Act 1978
