Statutory Interpretation (SA P2 CRIMINAL COURTS AND LAY PEOPLE)

Question 1

What is the Literal rule?

Answer 1

• Involves giving words their plain, ordinary, grammatical, literal meaning as would appear in a dictionary
• Applied even is it results in an absurd/harsh/ridiculous outcome

Question 2

Whiteley V Chappell

Answer 2

• 1968
• Literal rule
• D charged with impersonating ‘any person entitled to vote’ at an election
• Acquitted as he impersonated a dead person, a dead person is not entitled to vote!

Question 3

LNER V Berriman

Answer 3

• 1946
• Literal rule
• Railway worker only entitled to a lookout if they were ‘relaying or repairing’ the track
• Widow unable to claim compensation for husband’s death who was ‘oiling’ the track (maintenance)

Question 4

Fisher V Bell

Answer 4

• 1961
• Literal rule
• Shopkeeper D had flick-knives on display in shop window
• Restriction of Offences Act 1959 made it an offence to ‘offer for sale’ these knives
• D argued display in window is not ‘offer for sale’, under contract law it is an ‘invitation to treat’
• D not guilty

Question 5

What is the golden rule?

Answer 5

Modification of the literal rule, only used when the use of the literal rule would produce an absurd or unjust result

Question 6

Narrow use (golden rule)

Answer 6

• Where a work has 2 possible meanings but one would produce an unwanted or absurd outcome
• Court chooses the sensible meaning

Question 7

e.g narrow use

Answer 7

• R V Allen
• 1872
• Offence of bigamy committed by marrying someone while legally married to another
• Impossible to commit the offence
• Court held ‘marry’ should be interpreted to mean ‘to go through a ceremony of marriage’
• Convicted Allen

Question 8

Wide use (golden rule)

Answer 8

• Only one literal meaning of a word which would lead to an absurd outcome
• Used to alter meanings of words to avoid unwanted outcome

Question 9

e.g wide use

Answer 9

• Re Sigsworth
• 1935
• Son (murdered mother) prevented from inheriting mother’s estate under Administration of Estates Act 1925
• Wording of the Act was clear: D was the ‘next of kin’
• Court did not want him to benefit from his crime as its outcome would be absurd

Question 10

What is the Mischief Rule?

Answer 10

• Originated from Hayden’s Case 1584
• Looks back to gap in previous law and interprets the Act so as to cover the gap

Question 11

What four things are to be discussed and considered (mischief rule)?

Answer 11

• What was the old law?
• What was the problem/mischief with that law?
• What remedy did Parliament include in the new law?
• How can the new law be interpreted to suppress the mischief?

Question 12

Smith V Hughes

Answer 12

• 1960
• Mischief rule
• Words ‘soliciting in the agree’ in Street Offences Act 1958 held to include soliciting from window of a house

Question 13

Royal College of Nursing Case

Answer 13

• 1981
• Mischief rule
• Court considered wording of Abortion Act 1967 which allowed ‘registered medical practitioners’ to carry out abortions
• Court looked at ‘mischief’ Parliament was aiming to address, decided that nurses supervising part of procedure was not unlawful

Question 14

What is the Purposive approach?

Answer 14

• Give effect to Parliament’s intentions when passing a new law
• Extension of mischief rule

Question 15

Jones V Tower Boot

Answer 15

• 1997
• Purposive approach
• Court decided racial harassment by fellow workers was ‘in the course of employment’, making the employer liable
• Intention was to eliminate racism in the workplace, irrelevant that workers weren’t actually being paid to be racist

Question 16

R (Quintavalle) V Secretary of State

Answer 16

• 2003
• Purposive approach
• Court decided organisms created by cell nuclear replacement (CNR) came within the definition of ‘embryo’ in Human Embryology and Fertilisation Act 1990
• Act stated ‘embryo means live human embryo where fertilisation is complete’
• CNR does not require fertilisation but had not been developed when the Act was passed

Question 17

What are the 2 types of aids to interpretation?

Answer 17

• Intrinsic aids
• Extrinsic aids

Question 18

What are the 6 intrinsic aids?

Answer 18

• Long and short title: meat give clues to meaning of words used in Act (e.g RCN V DHSS)
• Preamble/purpose section: brief introduction to the Act, sets out its aims and objectives (e.g Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Act 2006)
• Interpretation section: explanation of key terms and phrases in an Act (e.g Theft Act s.1 1968)
• Schedules: additions to Act containing further details (e.g Hunting Act 2004)
• Explanatory notes: inserted by parliamentary draftsmen when the Act goes for printing
• Punctuation: should be taken into account by judges

Question 19

What are the 8 extrinsic aids?

Answer 19

• Dictionary: oxford dictionary, used to discover the plain ordinary meaning (e.g DPP V Cheeseman)
• Hansard: since Pepper V Hart, a. only be used if the word has been discussed during one of the debates in parliament during its passage
• Law Commission Reports: keep the law under review (e.g Coroners and Justice Act 2009)
• Precedent: case law appropriate to the area of law
• Human Rights Act 1998: interpret Acts to be consistent with European Convention of Human Rights
• EU law: influenced judges to adopt a purposive approach when interpreting statutes
• Academic textbooks: (e.g Dunlop V Selfridge 1915)
• Interpretation Act 1978: most acts use common phrases, ‘he’ will always mean ‘she’ and singular will always include plural

Question 20

Discuss the advantages of the literal rule

Answer 20

• Predictability: DPP V Cheeseman 1990: can undermine what parliament actually intended (Fisher V Bell)
• Respects parliamentary sovereignty: Whitley V Chappel 1968: can lead to absurd result (Berriman)
• Follows the separation of powers: LNER V Berriman 1946: ignores the limitations of language
• Encourages parliament to be precise: Fisher V Bell 1961: unrealistic