statutory interpretation Flashcards
what is statutory interpretation?
where judges work out the meaning of word/phrases in statutes
4 rules
golden rule
literal rule
mischief rule
the purposive approach
why do we need statutory interpretation?
words change in meaning over time
words can be taken out of context
broad words/phrasing that is unclear
statutes can be hurried
D of literal rule
judges use the literal rule to give words their plain, ordinary, literal meaning, even if this leads to an absurdity
what will be used to determine the plain meaning of a word for the literal rule?
a dictionary at the time of the act
Lord Esher: R v Judge of the City of London (literal rule)
If the words of an act are clear, you must follow them, even if they lead to manifest absurdity
If the words of an act are clear, you must follow them, even if they lead to manifest absurdity
Lord Esher: R v Judge of the City of London (literal rule)
who summarised the literal rule
Lord Esher: R v Judge of the City of London
advantages of the literal rule (1)
it respects parliamentary supremacy
the literal rule is likely to respect the fact that parliament is supreme and is elected to make laws
therefore judges have the role of applying the law as it is written
advantages of the literal rule (2)
it is easy to apply and so predictable
saves money as outcomes are more predictable to lawyers, so they can better advise their client
disadvantages of the literal rule 1
words have multiple meanings
can lead to inconsistencies in cases due to the judges not always knowing which definition to use.
disadvantages of the literal rule 2
can lead to unfair decisions
Cheeseman v DPP
Decisions such as Cheeseman show that the literal rule can have absurd decisions, meaning that bad decisions will be followed
when is the golden rule used?
when the literal rule leads to an absurd result, the golden rule can be used to avoid that result
2 types of golden rule
golden narrow approach
golden wider appraoch
golden narrow approach D
if there are multiple meanings of a word, then the judge can choose which one to follow
R v Allen
source for D of golden narrow
R v Allen
R v Allen
source for D of golden narrow
golden broad D
used by the court when a word only has one meaning but having to follow it would lead to an absurd result
Re Sigsworth
Re Sigsworth
source for golden broad approach
source for golden broad approach
Re Sigsworth
advantages of the golden rule (1)
respects parliamentary supremacy
it still uses the words which parliament included in the act
advantages of the golden rule (2)
avoids unjust situations usch as in Re Sigsworth’s
Creates justice in cases, leading to the correct outcomes
disadvantages of the golden rule 1
unpredictable
the judge decides whether the definition will lead to a bad outcome
makes it harder for lawyers to advise clients
disadvantages of the golden rule 2
of limited use
criticised by the law commission as it can only be used on rare occasions, such as if there was an absurd situation to avoid
where did the mischief rule originate
Heydon’s case 1854
what is entailed in the mischief rule
judges look at why parliament passed the legislation in the first place
case for the mischief rule
smith v hughes
advantages of the mischief rule 1
more flexible
allows the judge to look past the exact words of the statute but rather look at the concern of the statute
advantages of the mischief rule 2
produces just results
for eg smith v hughes - this is a common sense approach, making fairer outcomes
disadvantages of the mischief rule 1
unpredictable
makes it impossible for lawyers to know when the mischeif law will be used by judges
makes it harder to advise clients
disadvantages of the mischief rule 2
risk of judical law making
this goes against parliamentary supremacy as it shows that judges are trying to fill in the gaps and manipulate the law into what they think it should be
the purposive approach d
judges look at the purpose behind the act
what is the purposive approach used for
to interpret eu legislation and human rights law
source for purposive approach
RCN v DHSS
advantyages of purposive approach 1
helps to cover new situations
when there is a new technology or societal changes which weren’t present at the time
advantyages of purposive approach 2
gives judges more discretion
allows judges to avoid the literal meaning to avoid absurd results
disadvantages of purposive approach 1
allows unelected judged to make laws
parliament is elected to make laws, not judges, so they should instead focus on applying the law
disadvantages of purposive approach 2
too open to interpretation
judges cannot truly know parliament’s intention
makes inconsistencies between cases more likely to occur
