Need for statutory interpretation
- Bring definition to broad terms
- Ambiguity of words within the statute
- drafting errors
- new developments in society can lead to needing to interpret law in different ways in order to apply it to circumstances
- Changes in language
Literal rule
The literal rule says that the intention of Parliament is best found in the ordinary natural meaning of the words even if the result is absurd.
literal rule case
London and North Eastern Railway co-the Berriman 1946 - railway worker was killed while doing maintenance work oiling points along the rail line the fatal accidents act stated a look out should be provided for men working on the railway line for the purpose of ‘relaying or repairing’
advantages of literal rule
- democratic
- cases are predictable
- lawyers can plan for a defence
- respect the separation of powers an supremacy of Parliament
disadvantages of literal rule
- absurd results leading to lack of justice when morally deserved
- assumes the act is perfectly written
- ## parliament is unlikely to be able to cover all issues within one act
What is the golden rule
this rule says that if the literal rule produces an absurdity the court should look for another meaning of words to avoid this result.
Narrow approach- court can choose between the different meanings of the word or phrase if there is only one meaning then that meaning must be taken.
Broad approach- where the words have only one clear meaning but that meaning would lead to an absurdity in this case the court will use the golden rule to modify the words of the statute to avoid this problem
Golden rule broad approach case
Re Sigsworth- son murdered his mum he was been her ‘issue’ to inherit. No ambiguity but couldn’t let him be rewarded for his murder.
Golden rule narrow approach case
Adler V George- parked car obstructing the queens forces argued he was not ‘in the vicinity’ but IN the way.
Advantages of golden rule
- allows for sensible decisions
- respects authority of parliament
Disadvantages of golden rule
- lack predictability and guidelines
- only allows for changes in very limited circumstances
- couldn’t be used in berriman as although the result was unfair it wasn’t absurd or repugnant.
What is the mischief rule
The definition comes from the Heydons case (1584) where it was said that 4 points should be considered when interpreting:
- what was the common law before the Act
- what was the problem with the common law
- how did Parliament aim to amend it
- what was the reason for the amendment
mischief rule case
Smith V Hughes - women soliciting sex work from balconies however they weren’t literally breaking the law as they weren’t in a ‘street or public place’. However the mischief rule looked into what the act aimed to prevent and convicted the women
advantages of the mischief rule
- closes loopholes
- allows the law to develop and adapt to changing needs
- Judges have greater flexibility
- some judges may argue that they are respecting Parliaments wishes by giving effect to the true intention despite using a degree of discretion
- The law of commission recommends it and believes it should be the only one used out of the three
Unified approach
Proposed by Sir David Rupert cross the unified approach applies or three rules
first starting with the literal rule and if it results in an absurdity he moves on to the golden rule in the narrow approach and then moves on to the mischief rule this approach relies heavily on various aids and presumptions
Purposive approach
The purposive approach goes beyond the powers of the mischief rule because its not just looking for what the gap was in the old legislation. Judges decide what they believe Parliament meant to achieve. what the purpose was for the act.
advantages of purposive approach
- leads to justice in individual cases
- allows for new development in technology
- avoids absurd decisions
disadvantages of purposive approach
- difficult to find parliaments intentions
- allows judges to make law (undemocratic)- as they are deciding what they think the law should be rather than using the direct words of parliament .
- leads to uncertainty in the law(impossible to know when judges may use this approach making it diffuse for lawyers to predict outcomes for their clients)
case example for the purposive approach
R v secretary of state 2003 - ‘embryo means a live human embryo where fertilization is complete’ - held that the cloned embryos were covered by the statute. (pro life alliance)
what is the ejusdem genris rule
This states that when there is a list of specific words followed by general words then the general words should be interpreted in relation to the specific words.
ejusdem genris rule case example
Hobbs v CG Robertson ltd- injured eye when bricklaying. words of the act said that if a workman was ‘breaking cutting, dressing or carving stone concrete, slab or similar materials’ then they must be provided goggles. it was ruled that brick is not a similar material and so no compensation was allowed
what is expressio unius exclusio alterius
where there is a list of words which is not followed by general words them act applies only to the items in the list
expressio unius exclusio alterius case example
Tempest V kilner- wanted to see if the sale of stocks over £10 needed to have evidence in writing. ‘goods, wares and merchandise’ because stocks and shares weren’t mentioned they were not caught by the statute.
What is Noscitur a sociis
this means that the words must be looked at in context and interpreted accordingly involves looking at other words in the same section or other sections in the act.
Noscitur a sociis case example
Inland revenue commissioners v frere- The case involved interpreting a section which set out rules for ‘interest, annuities and other annual interests’. because of the words are the annual interest in the section the court decided the interest only meant annual interest
