Statutory Interpretation

Question 1

Define the Literal Rule.

Answer 1

(From Pinner v. Everett) Taking the natural and ordinary meaning of a word.

Question 2

Define the Mischief Rule.

Answer 2

Looking at what the Act was trying to prevent, i.e. what mischief or behaviour in society the Act was trying to prevent.

Question 3

Define the Purposive Approach.

Answer 3

Looking at the purpose of the Act. The definition which best fits the purpose is used.

Question 4

Define the Golden Rule, Golden Narrow, and Broad.

Answer 4

Golden: Starts by using the literal rule, adopts the meaning if it leads to absurdity.
Narrow: If a word had two meanings the judge will pick the meaning that is least absurd.
Broad: The word has only one meaning but it leads to absurdity .: the judge invents a new meaning for it.

Question 5

Which cases are examples of the Literal Rule?

Answer 5

(Pinner v. Everett), Whiteley v. Chappell, Fisher v. Bell, Cheeseman v. DPP

Question 6

Which cases are examples of the Mischief Rule?

Answer 6

(Heydon’s Case), Corkerey v. Carpenter, Smith v. Hughes, Royal College of Nursing v. DHSS

Question 7

Which cases are examples of the Purposive Approach?

Answer 7

Jones v. Tower Boot Company, Fitzpatrick v. Stirling Housing Association, Pepper v. Hart

Question 8

Which case is an example of the Golden Narrow?

Answer 8

Allen

Question 9

Which cases are examples of the Golden Broad?

Answer 9

Adler, Re: Sigsworth

Question 10

Describe the case of Whiteley v. Chappell

Answer 10

The D pretended to be, and voted in the name of a dead person. The word “person” was interpreted with the literal rule to naturally mean ‘person entitled to vote’ .: this would not include a dead person. Held: not guilty

Question 11

Describe the case of Fisher v. Bell

Answer 11

The D was a shopkeeper who had items for sale in his window. Among the display were flick knives. Charged under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 which made it an offence to “offer for sale” flick knives. Held: “OfS” literally means to state the price. Since there were no price tags he was found not guilty.

Question 12

Describe the case of Cheeseman v. DPP

Answer 12

D exposed himself in the park - charged under the Town and Country Planning Act 1847 with “exposing himself to passengers” - which literally means “people going to and fro” - since the police who caught him were not passing to and fro, he was found not guilty.

Question 13

Describe Heydon’s Case

Answer 13

The judge said the mischief rule was identifying the gap in common law before the Act, and trying to give the interpretation that would best fill that gap.

Question 14

Describe the case of Corkerey v. Carpenter

Answer 14

D riding a bike whilst drunk. s.12 of the Licensing Act 1872 made it an offence to be drunk in charge of a “carriage” on the highway. Held: guilty. The mischief of the Act was to prevent the endangerment of one’s self and other road users, so it best fit the mischief for carriage to include a bike.

Question 15

Describe the case of Smith v. Hughes

Answer 15

Ds were prostitutes charged under the Street Offences Act 1959 which made it an offence to solicit in a “public place”. However the Ds were on a privately owned balcony. Held: the Mischief of the Act was to prevent soliciting .: even though they were not not in “public” they were guilty as this best fit the mischief.

Question 16

Describe the case of Royal College of Nursing v. DHSS

Answer 16

Nurses from the Royal College questioned the Abortion Act 1967, which stated that only “medically registered practitioners” (meaning Doctor or GP - excluding nurses) could carry out abortions. Since the mischief of the Act was to prevent backstreet abortions it was Held that “MRP” could also mean nurses.

Question 17

Describe the case of Jones v. Tower Boot Company

Answer 17

Jones was being racially harassed at work in his lunch hour in the canteen. The Race Relations Act 1976 says that employers would be held responsible for bullying during the “course of employment.” Because the purpose of the RRA’76 was to prevent racism at work, it was interpreted that the lunch hour was in the “CoE”. .: guilty - as it best fit the purpose.

Question 18

Describe the case of Fitzpatrick v. Stirling Housing Association

Answer 18

C and his partner were living together when the partner died, with the house in his name .: the SHA asked the C to leave, as the Rent Act 1977 allowed “spouses” or “family relations” to stay. It was held that the C could stay as the purpose of the RA’77 was to prevent homelessness, and “spouse/family relation” could now include a gay partner.

Question 19

Describe the case of Pepper v. Hart

Answer 19

A group of private school teachers were not receiving “income” as they were given free education instead of money. This meant they did not pay tax, under the Finance Act 1976. Since the purpose of the Act was to collect taxes for the state, the judge ruled that “cash or the equivalent” would be regarded as “income” as it best fit the purpose of collecting it.

Question 20

Describe the case of Allen

Answer 20

D was charged with bigamy under s.57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The judge had to determine the meaning of the word “marriage.” This could mean to be legally married, or the process of the ceremony. If the 1st meaning was used the D would have been not guilty as one could .: not be legally married twice, which was absurd .: the judge ruled “married” to mean to go through the ceremony, which avoided an absurd outcome.

Question 21

Describe the case of Adler

Answer 21

The D had trespassed on a prohibited area, and obstructed an officer. The judge found that “in the vicinity” of said area would mean the surrounding grounds. Since this definition would lead to an absurd outcome it was held that it would now mean inside the area.: guilty.

Question 22

Describe the case of Re: Sigsworth

Answer 22

D had killed his mother to gain her inheritance. Here the word “issue” meant a child, but the judge gave a new meaning - a child who had not killed it’s parent(s) .: avoiding the absurd outcome of the killer benefiting from his crime.

Question 23

Explain “expressio unius est exclusio alterius.”

Answer 23

To express one thing, excludes another. When a statute gives a list, the statute only applies to the listed items. e.g. “this act applies to cats, dogs, and rabbits” it does not apply to fish. e.g. The Inhabitants of Sedgley (1837) - rates were charged on ‘land, titles, and coal mines’ .: held: rates could not be charged on Sledgley as they had tin mines which were excluded from the list.

Question 24

Explain “ejusdem generis.”

Answer 24

Just of the genre. When a list is followed by general or non-specific words, those general words are given the same meaning as the listed words, e.g. “this act applies to oranges, limes and lemons and any other fruit” grapes would not be counted as all the listed words have the same characteristics - they are citrus fruits. e.g. Powell v. Kempton Park Racecourse (1899) - the D was charged with keeping a ‘house, office, or room or other place for betting.’ He had been operating Taterstall’s ring which is outdoors. Held: not guilty as it was outside - all the listed items had roofs and walls, “OPfB” was given that meaning.

Question 25

Explain “Noscitur a sociis.”

Answer 25

The company it keeps. Words must be looked at in their context to understand the associated words. e.g. Reading - could mean the action of ‘to read’, or the place. e.g. Muir v. Keay (1975) - the D owned a coffee shop and did not have a license. The Refreshment Houses Act 1860 stated that all housing, rooms, shops, or buildings kept open for ‘entertainment’ during ‘certain hours of the night’ must be licensed. Held: the D required a license because looking at the context of the word entertainment it was relevant, when during the day you were doing the activity.

Question 26

List advantages of the literal rule.

Answer 26

1. Predictable and consistent as the same meaning is given every time a word is used in an Act and will not change. e.g. Vaughn v. Vaughn - molest, to annoy or vex
2. Upholding Parliamentary Sov. Judges are applying the will of parliament, who are democratically elected, unlike unelected judges are not making law, merely applying law passed by Parliament.

Question 27

List disadvantages of the literal rule.

Answer 27

1. rigidity – judges have no discretion so if a bad precedent or absurd results made then judges cannot provide justice in individual cases, e.g. LNER v. Berriman, meant “repairing” and “relaying” not “maintaining”
2. Assumption that draftsmen do perfect jobs. Virtually impossible, can use language carelessly e.g. Law Commission report on the Interpretation of Statutes 1969 “ignores the limitations of language” meaning the Literal can’t be right as the wording in the Act could be wrong.

Question 28

List advantages of the mischief rule.

Answer 28

1. avoidance of inappropriate absurd outcomes of literal rule e.g. MvGonagle v. Westminster City Council - D argued that he didn’t need a license (as set out in the Miscellaneous Prisons Act 1982) for his sex club, even though the business was illegal.
2. actually see justice being done - attempt to follow the will of Parliament. as it focuses on Mischief it directly follows why the Act was made and the will of its writers. e.g. RCN v. DHSS Parl. didn’t want backstreet abortions back in 1967, it would have been fine for the nurses to carry out.

Question 29

List disadvantages of the mischief rule.

Answer 29

1. Undemocratic. The judiciary has the power to make law, but they are unelected and do not represent public opinion, e.g. this is why we elect our MPs. .: the judiciary is being given too much power.
2. The method is outdated - created in the C16 when we used common law, sovereignty was not established until the end of the C17, in C16 Acts had lengthy preambles which would state the mischief/purpose of the Act.

Question 30

List advantages of the golden rule.

Answer 30

1. deals with the unfairness of the literal rule e.g. if Re: Sigsworth was literal he would have inherited the money he killed his mother for as he was literally her “issue”, golden avoided this absurdity of him benefiting from his crime.
2. attempt to follow the will of Parliament who would want a just outcome. e.g. Adler. intent was to prevent officer obstruction, even though it wasn’t worded correctly, it achieves the aim of the Act.

Question 31

List disadvantages of the golden rule.

Answer 31

1. No definition of ‘absurd’ .: it is up to each judge to decide if the outcome is absurd e.g. Re: Sigsworth. Technically the “issue” should have inherited, but it was absurd that he should benefit his crime.
2. It gives too much power to the judges. They are unelected and by changing meanings e.g. Adler “in the vicinity” they are technically making law, this is why we elect Gov. it’s undemocratic.

Question 32

List advantages of the purposive approach.

Answer 32

1. In some cases it is more likely to give effect to the intention of Parl. e.g. Pepper v. Hart, the intention here was to collect taxes (had the literal rule been used, no tax would be paid).
2. The same approach is used by other EU countries and the ECJ. Compatible and consistent in each country so the same outcomes are achieved.

Question 33

List disadvantages of the purposive approach.

Answer 33

1. Judges can overstep their role by making public policy decisions. e.g. Fitzpatrick v. SHA the judge made decisions concerning homosexual relationships , that the Gov hadn’t made.
2. Too much power to the unelected judiciary - lots of Acts don’t have a preamble so the judge has too much power in deciding the purpose.

Question 34

Explain Preambles as an Intrinsic Aid.

Answer 34

A statement setting gout the purpose of the Act. Tells the judge the purpose, can help if purposive ap. or mischief rule are used. e.g. CC&SSA’06 “to enhance the UK’s contribution to combatting Climate Change.”

Question 35

Explain Long/Short titles as an Intrinsic Aid.

Answer 35

The name of the law. Let’s the judge know what the Act is about. The long title gives information about the purpose/mischief of the act. An Act to amend and clarify the law relating to the termination of pregnancy by a medically registered practitioner. aka The Abortion Act 1967.

Question 36

Explain Definitions Sections as an Intrinsic Aid.

Answer 36

A part of the Act where words used in the Act are defined. Lets the judge know what a particular word means in that specific Act. e.g. The Theft Act 1968: defines “property” as “anything owned by a person but not including electricity or dead bodies.”

Question 37

Explain Schedule as an Intrinsic Aid.

Answer 37

Additions to the main Act - like a footnote. It gives more information about something mentioned in the Act. e.g. s.2(1) of the Hunting Act 2004 says “hunting is exempt if it in a class is specified in schedule 1.”

Question 38

Explain Dictionaries as an Extrinsic Aid.

Answer 38

A book containing the definitions of words. Can be used to find the literal meaning of a word. e.g. Vaughn v. Vaughn (1973) ‘molest’ D harassed his ex-wife not actually touched her, but guilty as the dict. def. meant to ‘cause trouble, vex or annoy.’

Question 39

Explain Previous Acts of Parliament as an Extrinsic Aid.

Answer 39

An Act passed before. A judge can review a similar Act this explains and expands on the Act. e.g. Wheatley (1979) The court of appeal hd to interpret the Explosive Substances Act 1883 aka an Act to amend the Provisions of the Explosive Substances Act 1875.

Question 40

Explain Hansard as an Extrinsic Aid.

Answer 40

Transcript of what is said in Parl. The minister/promoter may explain the purpose of the Act + how words/phrases are intended to be interpreted. e.g. Pepper v. Hart - to find the meaning of ‘income’ also said that Hansard can be referred to if 1. leg is ambiguous 2. Material relied on consists of statements made by a minister or promoter 3. The statement relied on is clear.

Question 41

Explain the Interpretations Act 1978 as an Extrinsic Aid.

Answer 41

Act that defines words commonly used in Acts. Clarifies + makes the judges job quicker. e.g. Masculine shall include feminine and singular include the plural unless stated in the Act.