Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law > Statutory Interpretation (GREEN BOOKLET) > Flashcards

Statutory Interpretation (GREEN BOOKLET) Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

What is statutory interpretation?

A

Interpretation of statutes by judges

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

When do judges interpret statutes?

A

In cases in court in order to reach a verdict

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Who carries out statutory interpretation?

A

Judges and magistrates

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Why is statutory interpretation needed?

A

Broad terms, ambiguity, drafting errors new inventions/technology, changes in the use of language

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What three things can judges use to help them interpret statutes?

A

Aids, rules of language, rules of interpretation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the four rules of statutory interpretation?

A

Literal rule, Golden rule, Mischief rule, Purposive approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Define the literal rule

A

The literal rule involves applying the plain, ordinary, literal meaning of words, even if it would lead to an absurdity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Name the 3 leading cases of the literal rule

A

Whiteley v Chappell
LNER v Berriman
DDP v Cheeseman

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Describe the case facts of Whiteley v Chappell

A

D had voted by using the name of someone who had died

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What were the words in question in the case of Whiteley v Chappell

A

‘Entitled to vote’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Why was the defendant in the case of Whiteley v Chappell acquitted?

A

Because a dead person isn’t ‘entitled to vote’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Describe the case facts of LNER v Berriman

A

The claimant was sueing LNER as her husband died due to a lack of look out man while oiling the railway line

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What were the words in question in the case of LNER v Berriman?

A

‘Relaying and repairing’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Which statute was being interpreted in the case of LNER v Berriman?

A

Fatal Accidents Act 1946

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Was the defendant found liable in the case of LNER v Berriman?

A

No because oiling the track was classified as maintaining the track and not ‘relaying and repairing’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the case facts of DDP v Cheeseman

A

D was found masturbating in public toilets by police who were stationed there to arrest him

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What was the word in question in the case of DDP v Cheeseman?

A

‘Passengers’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Which statute was being interpreted in the case of DDP v Cheeseman?

A

Town and Police clauses act 1847

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What did the judge decide in the case of DDP v Cheeseman?

A

That the policemen weren’t passers-by as they had been stationed in the public toilets specifically and therefore the defendant was acquitted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What was the defendant charged with in the case of DDP v Cheeseman?

A

‘exposing one’s person to the annoyance of passengers’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Explain how the golden rule works

A

1) Start by using literal rule 2) If literal rule will lead to absurdity 3) use the golden rule to avoid absurdity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Describe how the narrow approach works

A

Judges can choose the meaning of the word which has more than one meaning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Describe how the broach approach works

A

Judges can modify the meaning of a word which has one clear meaning in order to avoid an absurdity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Describe the case facts of R v Allen

A

D was already married when he married another woman and was charged with bigamy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Which statute contained the offence presented in the case of R v Allen

A

Offences against the person act 1861

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What was the key word in the statute that the judge had to interpret in the case of R v Allen?

A

‘Marry’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

How did the judge in the case of R v Allen decide to interpret the word ‘marry’?

A

‘To go through a ceremony of marriage’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What was the outcome of the case R v Allen?

A

D was convicted of bigamy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Describe the case facts of Adler v George

A

D gained access to RAF station where he obstructed an officer on duty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

What offence was the defendant charged with in the case of Adler v George?

A

‘Obstructing a member of the armed forces in the vicinity of a prohibited place’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What were the words in question in the case of Adler v George?

A

‘In the vicinity’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

How did the judge interpret the phrase ‘in the vicinity’ in the case of Adler v George

A

‘In or in the vicinity’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Which approach of the golden rule was applied in the case of Adler v George?

A

Broad

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What was the outcome of Adler v George

A

D was convicted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Describe the facts of the case Re Sigsworth

A

D murdered his mother to inherit her estate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

What was the statute in question in the case of Re Sigsworth?

A

Administration of Estates act 1925

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

What did the statute say would happen to the estate of someone who hadn’t made a will?

A

That it would be inherited by their ‘issue’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

How did the court interpret the statute in the case of Re Sigsworth?

A

That ‘issue’ didn’t include someone who had killed the deceased

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

What was the outcome in the case of Re Sigsworth?

A

D didn’t inherit the estate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

What approach was applied to the case of R v Allen?

A

Narrow approach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

What is the leading case that outlined the mischief rule?

A

Heydon’s case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

List the 4 questions outlined in Heydon’s case that must be asked when using the mischief rule

A

1) What was the common law before the Act was made?
2) What was the mischief and defect for which the common law didn’t provide?
3) What was the remedy that parliament created to cure the disease?
4) What was the reason for the remedy?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

What do judges look at under the mischief rule?

A

The law before the Act to see what mischief the Act was intended to cover

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Describe case facts of Smith v Hughes

A

Prostitutes were harassing men from behind windows and balconies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Which statute was being interpreted in the case of Smith v Hughes?

A

Street offences act 1959

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

Where did the statute make it an offence of the prostitutes to be? (in the case of Smith v Hughes)

A

‘in a street or public place’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

What was the mischief that the act was trying to solve in the case of Smith v Hughes?

A

People being approached/harassed by prostitutes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

What was the outcome of Smith v Hughes?

A

The prostitutes were convicted as it was decided it did not matter where they were because they were still bothering people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

In the case of RCoN v DHSS, what was the statute in question?

A

Abortion act 1967

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

What wording was being interpreted by the judge in the case of RCoN v DHSS?

A

‘registered medical practicioner’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

What was the problem with the way that abortions were being carried out in the case of RCoN v DHSS?

A

That nurses were carrying out abortions despite not being ‘registered medical practitioner’s’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

What did the judges identify as the mischief aiming to be solved in the case of RCoN v DHSS?

A

Unsafe abortions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

What was the outcome of the case of RCoN v DHSS?

A

The nurses were considered as ‘registered medical practitioner’ and were legally allowed to carry out abortions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

Describe the case facts of Corkery v Carpenter

A

D was pushing his bike along the pavement while intoxicated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

What was the statute in question in the case of Corkery v Carpenter?

A

Licensing act 1872

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

What offence was D charged with in the case of Corkery v Carpenter?

A

‘Being drunk in charge of a carriage’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

What was the mischief that the act was trying to solve in the case of Corkery v Carpenter?

A

Preventing people being in charge of transport while intoxicated

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

What was the outcome of the case of Corkery v Carpenter?

A

D was found guilty as his bicycle counted as a ‘carriage’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

What are judges trying to achieve when using the purposive approach?

A

They are trying to consider the ‘purpose’ of the statute in question and uphold parliament’s intentions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

Name 2 cases where judges opted to use the purposive approach

A

Jones v Tower Boot Company

R v Registrar-General ex parte Smith

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

Describe the brief case facts of Jones v Tower Boot

A

Claimant was suing his employer for harassment experienced in the work place due to racial discrimination

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

What was the statute in question in the case of Jones v Tower Boot?

A

Race relations act 1976

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

What was the key phrase which the court had to interpret in the case of Jones v Tower Boot?

A

‘Course of employment’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

Why did the court not choose to use the literal rule in the case of Jones v Tower Boot?

A

Because the actions of employees couldn’t be considered as an improper mode of carrying out tasks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

Why did the court choose to use the purposive approach in the case of Jones v Tower Boot?

A

Because otherwise the employer would’ve faced no responsibility for the scale of harassment endured by the claimant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

What is the purpose of the Race relations act 1976?

A

To prevent racial discrimination in the work place

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

What was the outcome in the case of Jones v Tower Boot?

A

The employer was liable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

Describe the brief case facts of R v Registrar-General ex parte Smith

A

D was applying for his birth certificate in the proper manner however the Registrar-General had refused to supply him with his birth records

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

Which was the statute in question in the case of R v RG ex parte Smith

A

Adoption Act 1976

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

Why did the court not want to interpret the words ‘shall supply’ in the literal meaning?

A

Because they did not want to put D’s birth mother at risk (as he was convicted of 2 murders on account of psychotic illness)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

In the case of R v RG ex parte Smith, what did the court say that Parliament could not have intended to do?

A

Promote serious crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

What was the outcome of the case R v RG ex parte Smith?

A

The Registrar-General did not have to supply the information to D

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

Give 3 advantages of the literal rule

A

Creates certainty in the law
Respects parliamentary supremacy
Easy to use and saves time

74
Q

Why does the literal rule create certainty in the law?

A

Because if all judges interpret words in the same way it keeps the law consistent and fair

75
Q

Give an example whereby the literal rule created certainty within the law

A

LNER v Berriman: Compensation is only payable in cases whereby V is relaying and repairing the track

76
Q

What is the consequence of the literal rule creating certainty in the law?

A

Law is certain, consistent and fair
D’s can prepare for likely outcome of case
Lawyers can accurately advise their clients
Public know what the law is

77
Q

How does the literal rule respect Parliamentary supremacy?

A

By ensuring judges interpret law exactly how it is written by parliament

78
Q

Give an example whereby the literal rule respected Parliamentary Supremacy

A

LNER v Berriman: Despite the absurd result, the court had followed the exact wording of the statute of ‘relaying and repairing’

79
Q

Why is the literal rule easy to use and how does it save time?

A

Because meanings of words don’t need to be thought about

80
Q

Give an example whereby the literal rule was easy to use and saved time

A

Whiteley v Chappell: The court only needed to decide what ‘entitled to vote’ meant; there was no need for make moral decisions or hear arguments`

81
Q

What is the consequence of the literal rule respecting parliamentary supremacy?

A

Allows parliament to remain the ultimate and supreme law making authority

82
Q

What is the consequence of the literal rule being easy to use and saving time?

A

Judges can decide cases quickly and easily as there is no difficulty of trying to decide what ‘should’ happen in a case

83
Q

What are the 3 disadvantages of the literal rule?

A

Leads to absurd decisions
Assumes unattainable perfection in draftmanship
May be hard to agree on ‘literal’ meanings

84
Q

Why does the literal rule lead to absurd decisions?

A

Because parliament cannot legislate for every eventuality so statute’s do not cover every possible situation

85
Q

Give an example whereby the literal rule led to an absurd decision

A

DDP v Cheeseman: D was acquitted for masturbating in public toilets as the policeman didn’t qualify as ‘passengers’ despite D previously harassing other members of the public

86
Q

What’s the consequence of the literal rule leading to absurd decisions?

A

Can lead to injustices and lack of respect for the law

87
Q

Why is it a problem that the literal rule assumes unattainable perfection in draftmanship?

A

Because parliament cannot legislate for every possible situation; it is impossible

88
Q

Give an example whereby Parliament’s draftmanship didn’t include each possible situation

A

LNER v Berriman: Parliament’s use of words ‘relaying and repairing’ were too narrow and doesn’t provide for other dangerous tasks

89
Q

What’s the consequence of assuming perfection in draftmanship?

A

Assuming perfection can lead to absurd results which parliament didn’t intend

90
Q

Why might it be difficult to agree on ‘literal’ meanings of words?

A

Because some words have more than one meaning

91
Q

Give an example whereby a word had more than one meaning in a case and the literal rule couldn’t be used

A

R v Allen: D married another woman while already married (OAPA 1861). Literal rule couldn’t be used are there are 2 meanings of the word ‘marry’

92
Q

What is the consequence of words having more than one meaning in the case of the literal rule?

A

Multiple meanings can make applying the literal rule

difficult for judges. The literal rule therefore loses its advantage of “easy to use and saves time”

93
Q

What are the 3 advantages of the Golden rule?

A

Avoids absurdities
Gives rise to Parliament’s true intentions
Applies to words with multiple meanings

94
Q

How does the golden rule avoid absurdities?

A

Because it allows judges to choose between meanings of words or modify the meaning of words

95
Q

Give an example whereby the golden rule helped to avoid an absurdity

A

R v Allen: Judges avoided absurdity by using narrow approach of ‘marry’ to find D guilty of an offence otherwise impossible to commit (bigamy)

96
Q

What is the consequence of the golden rule avoiding absurdities?

A

Makes the law just and fair

Public have faith in and respect for the law

97
Q

How does the golden rule give rise to Parliament’s true intentions?

A

By allowing judges to interpret statutes in such a way that leads to sensible and just outcomes

98
Q

Give an example whereby the golden rule gave rise to Parliament’s true intentions

A

Re Sigsworth: Use of the rule prevented D inheriting his mother’s estate. This met parliament’s intention as to prevent criminal’s from benefitting from their crime

99
Q

What is a consequence of the golden rule giving rise to Parliament’s true intentions?

A

Golden rule prevents absurd and unjust outcomes

100
Q

How does the golden rule apply to words with multiple meanings?

A

Because when using the narrow approach, judges can choose between the meanings of a word

101
Q

Give an example whereby the golden rule applied to a word with multiple meanings

A

R v Allen: ‘Marry’ had more than one meaning and the golden rule allowed the judge to choose the meaning that would result in a rational result

102
Q

What is the consequence of the Golden rule applying to words with ore than one meaning?

A

Fixes problem of multiple meanings within literal rule and makes the law quick and easy to interpret

103
Q

What are the 3 disadvantages of the Golden rule?

A

Creates uncertainty within the law
Erodes parliamentary supremacy
Inflexible (narrow approach)

104
Q

How does the golden rule create uncertainty within the law?

A

Judges have to decide their own definition of ‘absurd’ - different judges interpret it in different ways

105
Q

Give an example whereby the golden rule created uncertainty within the law

A

Re Sigsworth: Not all judges will agree with the decision that it is absurd for a criminal to benefit from crime

106
Q

What is a consequence of the Golden rule creating uncertainty within the law?

A

Different outcomes in similar cases shows the law as inconsistent
Lawyers unable to prepare cases
Public become uncertain

107
Q

How does the golden rule erode parliamentary supremacy?

A

Broad approach allows judges to override what Parliament has said

108
Q

Give an example whereby the golden rule has eroded parliamentary supremacy

A

Adler v George: Judges changed the law by adding ‘in or’ and therefore undermined parliament

109
Q

What is a consequence of the golden rule eroding parliamentary supremacy?

A

Judges call into question Parliament’s role as senior UK law making body

110
Q

How is the golden rule inflexible?

A

When using the narrow approach, judges are still restricted to two dictionary meanings

111
Q

Give an example whereby the golden rule was inflexible?

A

Adler v George: No interpretation would’ve resulted in D being acquitted as there was no interpretation for narrow approach so broad approach had to be used

112
Q

What is a consequence of the golden rule being inflexible?

A

Judges are still highly restricted

113
Q

Name the 3 advantages of the mischief rule

A

Avoids absurdities
Promotes flexibility
Saves parliament amending laws

114
Q

How does the mischief rule avoid absurdities?

A

By allowing judges to look beyond literal meanings of words in order to find the problem that parliament was trying to solve

115
Q

Give an example whereby the mischief rule avoided an absurdity

A

Smith v Hughes: Problem was prostitutes harassing passersby; it was irrelevant where they were located

116
Q

What is the consequence of the mischief rule avoiding absurdities?

A

Law is more just and the public have more faith in the law

117
Q

How does the mischief rule promote flexibility?

A

Literal meanings can be overlooked and judges use legal knowledge to come to sensible decision

118
Q

Give an example whereby the mischief rule promoted flexibility?

A

Royal college of nursing: Judges interpreted ‘registered medical practitioner’ to involve nurses in order to accommodate medical advances

119
Q

What is the consequence of the mischief rule promoting flexibility?

A

Judges can reach more sensible and just decisions

120
Q

How does the mischief rule prevent parliament from having to amend laws?

A

Judges are filling in gaps in the law for Parliament. This saves Parliament from having to spend time re-examining old Acts

121
Q

Give an example whereby the mischief rule prevented parliament from having to amend laws

A

RCN v DHSS - no need for parliament to revisit the abortion act 1967 as judges can update the law through cases

122
Q

What is the consequence of the mischief rule preventing parliament from having to amend laws?

A

Parliament can focus its time and energy on more substantial problem areas of law

123
Q

Name the 3 disadvantages of the mischief rule

A

Creates uncertainty within the law
Erodes parliamentary supremacy
Limited to fixing one problem

124
Q

How does the mischief rule create uncertainty within the law?

A

If different judges identify the mischief then this may lead to different outcomes in similar cases which leaves the law uncertain and inconsistent

125
Q

What is the consequence of the mischief rule creating uncertainty within the law?

A

Lawyers and defendants are unable to prepare their case and the public are unsure of what they can/cannot do

126
Q

How does the mischief rule erode parliamentary supremacy?

A

The rule allows for judges to create the law and apply new meanings and thus eroding parliamentary supremacy as it implies that parliament’s law is wrong

127
Q

Give an example whereby the mischief rule eroded parliamentary supremacy

A

RCN v DHSS - 2/5 judges disagreed with the use of the mischief rule and said that the other 3 were rewriting the law and it wasn’t their place to do this

128
Q

What is a consequence of the mischief rule eroding parliamentary supremacy?

A

Judges call into question Parliament’s role as senior UK law making body which creates issues as judges are not elected

129
Q

How is the mischief rule limited to fixing only one problem?

A

Judges can only use the mischief rule to “fill the gap” in the old law, rather than give rise to Parliament’s real purpose

130
Q

Give an example whereby the mischief rule was limited to fixing only one problem

A

R v Registrar General ex parte Smith- Mischief rule could not be used here. The purpose of the Adoption Act was to reunite families. It was not to fix the mischief of serial killers murdering their mothers

131
Q

What is a consequence of the mischief rule being limited to only one problem?

A

Mischief rule can be of limited use as it does not go so far as to consider Parliament’s purpose in enacting a statute

132
Q

How does the purposive approach avoid absurd decisions?

A

Allows judges to ignore strict meanings and instead decide on parliament’s purpose which thus covers more situations

133
Q

Give an example where the purposive approach could’ve avoided an absurd decision

A

LNER v Berriman - had the PA been used then it would’ve been decided that FAA’s purpose was to improve safety of workers and thus D would’ve been found liable

134
Q

What is a consequence of the purposive approach avoiding absurd decisions?

A

Law is more just and society has more faith in the law

135
Q

How does the purposive approach allow for social, economic and technological change?

A

Judges can interpret a statute widely to accomodate changes and thus preventing parliament from having to redraft statutes every time a change occurs

136
Q

Give an example where the purposive approach allowed for social, economic and technological change

A

RCoN v DHSS - By taking medical advances into account, judges included nurses under the term ‘registered medical practitioner’ so they could carry out abortions

137
Q

What is a consequence of the PA allowing for social, economic and technological change?

A

Parliament can focus their time on more substantial problem areas within the law

138
Q

How does the purposive approach save parliament time?

A

PA is closer to the european approach where judges can arrive at a decision that parliament would

139
Q

Give an example where the PA saved parliament time

A

Jones v Tower Boot - Parliament didn’t have to draft to draft a new statute as judges could recognise what parliament would want and fixed law for them

140
Q

What is a consequence of PA saving parliament time?

A

Parliament can focus on more substantial problem areas in the law

141
Q

How does PA create uncertainty within the law?

A

Judges may not agree on the purpose of statute and different judges will interpret differently

142
Q

What is a consequence of PA creating uncertainty within the law?

A

Lawyers/D’s unable to prepare for trials and public uncertainty

143
Q

How does PA erode parliamentary supremacy?

A

PA comes with a risk of judicial law making meaning judges take over parliament’s role of law making

144
Q

Give an example where PA was eroding parliamentary supremacy

A

R v RG ex parte Smith - Judges ignored parliaments wording of ‘shall supply’ and interpreted them in the complete opposite way - denying C of birth certificates

145
Q

What is a consequence of the PA eroding parliamentary supremacy?

A

Creates risk of unelected judges deciding what’s best for the public

146
Q

How does the PA result in judiciary being too powerful?

A

As there are no guidelines on how to use the purposive approach

147
Q

Give an example where PA meant judiciary was too powerful

A

R v Clinton - Statute said ‘loss of control’ defence was only applicable when there was a ‘qualifying trigger’ which didn’t include infidelity - however judges ignored this and acquitted D of murder

148
Q

What are the two types of aids of interpretation?

A

Intrinsic and extrinsic

149
Q

Where are intrinsic aids found?

A

Within the statute, used to help judges with interpretation

150
Q

Name 4 examples of intrinsic aids

A

Headings, Long title, Short title, Definition sections

151
Q

What are definition sections used for?

A

To define ambiguous or broad terms within an Act

152
Q

What is a case example where the definition section was used?

A

Oxford v Moss

153
Q

Describe how the definition section in the case of Oxford v Moss was used

A

Used to define ‘property’ and concluded that information was not property that could be stolen

154
Q

What is the short title used for?

A

Informs judges what the Act will cover so they know which act to refer to

155
Q

Give an example where the short title of an Act was useful

A

LNER v Berriman

156
Q

Describe how the short title was useful in the case of LNER v Berriman

A

Fatal Accidents act was referred to as there was a fatal accident on the railway

157
Q

Where are extrinsic aids found?

A

Found outside the statute - used by judges to help interpretation

158
Q

Give 4 examples of extrinsic aids

A

Interpretation Act, Law reform reports, Hansard, Dictionaries

159
Q

What is the purpose of law reform reports?

A

To explain why a statute was enacted

160
Q

Give an example where a law reform report was used

A

DDP v Bull

161
Q

How was the Wolfenden Report useful for the case of DDP v Bull?

A

It stated that the Street Offences Act was created to eliminate female prostitution and thus the male prostitutes were acquitted

162
Q

What is Hansard?

A

A report of parliamentary debate to decipher parliament’s intentions

163
Q

What case prohibited the use of hansard?

A

Davis v Johnson

164
Q

What case now permits hansard?

A

Pepper v Hart

165
Q

How are dictionaries used to help interpretation?

A

Used to help judges understand words in an Act

166
Q

Give a case example where a dictionary was used to help interpretation

A

DDP v Cheeseman

167
Q

How was a dictionary used in DDP v Cheeseman to acquit D?

A

Used to define ‘passenger’ as ‘passer-by’ and concluded D was not guilty on the basis that the policeman were not passers by

168
Q

What are the 3 rules of language?

A

Ejusdem Generis, Expressio unius est exclusio alterius, Noscitur a sociis

169
Q

Translate ‘ejusdem generis’

A

‘Things of the same kind’

170
Q

Describe when ‘ejusdem generis’ will apply

A

Where there is a list of at least 2 words followed by a general word, the general word takes it’s meaning from the specific words before it

171
Q

Give a case example where ‘ejusdem generis’ was used

A

Powell v Kempton Park racecourse

172
Q

Describe the brief case facts of Powell v Kempton Park Racecourse

A

Betting Act 1853, ‘house, room, office or other place’ referred to indoor places so didn’t apply to outdoor racecourse

173
Q

Translate ‘expressio unius est exclusio alterius’

A

‘Where the inclusion of one type excludes the other’

174
Q

Describe when ‘expressio unius est exclusio alterius’ will apply

A

When there is a list of words not followed by a general word, the act will only apply to the words included in the list

175
Q

Give a case example where ‘expressio unius est exclusio alterius’ applied

A

Inhabitants of Sedgeley

176
Q

Outline brief case facts of inhabitants of sedgeley

A

Statute raised taxes on ‘land, houses and coal mines’ and thus didn’t include limestone mines

177
Q

Translate ‘noscitur a sociis’

A

‘To be interpreted in context’

178
Q

How is ‘noscitur a sociis’ used?

A

This involves looking at other words in the same section or same act

179
Q

Give a case example when ‘noscitur a sociis’ was used

A

Inland revenue commissioners v Frere

180
Q

Outline brief case facts of Inland revenue commissioners v Frere

A

A section of the act referred to ‘interest, annuities or other annual interest’ and thus it was concluded that ‘interest’ was only referring to annual interest as it was referred to specifically in the same section

Law (25 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions