To summarise, this assignment explained that statutoryinterpretation is a method of interpreting and applying legislation. It is vital to use statutory interpretation asa guide to control the fundamental meanings to statutes and legislation.
Thisincludes applying the common law rules of statutory interpretation against thepresent case.Conclusion As an example, mischief rule is found in the case of Corkeryv Carpenter (1951). In 1951 Shane Corkery was condemned to one month in jailfor being drunk in charge of a bicycle in public. At around 2.45 p.m. on 18 January1950, the defendant was drunk and was pushing his pedal bicycle along BroadStreet in Ilfracombe. He was subsequently charged under section 12 of theLicensing Act 1872 with being drunk and in charge of a carriage.
The 1872 Actmade no actual reference to bicycles. The court elected to use the mischiefrule to decide the matter. The objective of the Act was to prevent people fromusing any form of transport on a public highway whilst in a state ofintoxication. The bicycle was clearly a form of transport and therefore theuser was correctly charged. Law student, 2010 ) Lawade.comAt one level it is evidently the most flexible rule ofinterpretation, but it is limited to using previous common law to determinewhat mischief the Act in question was designed to remedy. The case itself concerneda dispute about legislation passed under Henry VIII in 1540 and a legal actionagainst Heydon for intruding into certain lands in the county of Devon.Mischief rule is the oldest rules.
This rule is principally usedto interpret statutes, judges can applyinto statutory interpretation to discover Parliament’s intention. However, thisrule requires the court to first look atwhat the law was before the statute, in order to discover what gap or mischiefthe statute was intended to cover. The court is then essential for the interpretationof the statute in a way that the gap is covered. The rule summaries theHeydon’s Case (1584), where it was said that for the true interpretation of astatute, a few aspects have to be taken in consideration such as what was thecommon law before the making of the Act, what was the mischief and defect forwhich the common law did not provide and the true reason of the remedy.
Mischief Rule The wide approach by Adler v George 1964 showed that thedefendant was accused for obstructing a guard in the execution of his duty, asthe Act 1920 outlines that no person in vicinity duty or the chief officer shall be obstructed orthe person will be convicted as guilty. The defendant claimed that since he wasin the forbidden place and not in the vicinity of it, he should not be foundguilty. Moreover, If the court agreed touse the first term, that would say that the defendant would be innocent andthat would be an absurd decision. Courts came across this decision to clarifythat whether a person is near or in the vicinity of the prohibited place, it isnot right to obstruct it.This rule has the same principles of literal rule and isused when literal interpretation causes an unjust result. In other words, thegolden rule is a modification of literal rule and it enable the judges to lookat the words in context. The court always begins the case with literal ruleapproach, however, if this rule fails on its logic, then golden rule could beapplied.
The golden rule can be interpreted in two ways; a narrow approach anda wide approach. The narrow approach term reflects on the judge’s views of howthe golden rule must be applied and has more than one meaning. In this case thejudge applies the meaning which best outfits the situation in which the word isbeing interpreted. The R v Allen 1872 and Adler v Georgia 1964 cases areprobably the best case which exemplifies the use of golden rule, the R v Allencase, the defendant Allen was accused of adultery. The section 57 of theOffences Against the Person Act 1861 evidently states that ‘anyone who being married shall marry anyother person during the life of the former husband/wife shall be guilty ofbigamy.’ Legislation.gov.uk, 2002)The challenge caused in court was in relation to the word marry.
So, to make sense, the court decided thatthe word married should also mean a legal form and ceremony of marriage withanother person. Nevertheless, as the defendant was already married it only madesense to the judges to implement the general meaning of the word. If the judgesused another word instead of marriage this would have led to bigamy and couldhave resulted in an absurd verdict.Golden Rule This rule is the first of many rules of statutoryinterpretation. Literal rule can be defined as “giving words” as they are giventheir ordinary and natural meaning. Courts normally applies to literal rulebefore applying to any other rules. Although, when this rule an applied the lawis read word by word and the court has the job to interpret it as it truly is andnot to be explained in a way that they think it should be explained.
An exampleof literal rule can be seen through the study of Fisher v Bell (1960), where a retailerhad a knife for display on his shop window. “Any person who manufactures, sells or hires or offers for sale or hireany knife which has a blade which opens automatically by hand pressure appliedto a button shall be guilty of an offence”. Essaysauce, 2017 This Actpractically recommends that the retailer should be convicted as guilty. But,the court determined that this retailer was not a victim of any offence.
Theowner only had the knife in the shop window with a price and was not sellingit. Even though, the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 says that anindividual should not bargain knife blade for sale, it is certain that thisterm should be given the literal rule and the shop owner should not beprosecuted. Many cases which involves the literal rule have caused numerousproblems, there have been circumstances in which literal rule has causedinjustice. The public could believe that judges are being partial and that somepeople do not deserve the sentence that they have been given. Also, the literalrule can be very difficult to apply in some cases.
Literal rule To assess statutoryinterpretation the use of three explicit statutory rules is needed. Rules hadbeen established so that framework of interpretation could be provided, theserules are the common approach in terms of examining the meaning of languagesused in courts. These are known as the Literal Rule, the Golden Rule and theMischief Rule.
Statutory rules Before sketching out the methodologies of statutoryinterpretation, it is important to comprehend the correct importance of it. Statutoryinterpretation is the process by which courts interpret legislation or an actof parliament to a better understanding of the statute. House of Lords receivesat about 75% of cases and those cases are concerned with statutoryinterpretation, the words of a statute can have straightforward meaning,however, sometimes courts have to interpret statutes because it could beconfusing and indistinct to understand as they can have diverse meaning. It needsto be understood precisely in order that the respondents get the right sentencefor the crimes they are being accused of. This is one of the reasons that thejudges role is to clarify the uncertainty of these words may cause.
To approachthe correct method, parliaments created the Interpretation Act 1978 to guidejudges when applying statutes as bills and legislation. The Interpretation Act1978 states that “In any Act, unless thecontrary intention appears; words importing the masculine gender include thefeminine, words importing the feminine gender include the masculine, words inthe singular include the plural and words in the plural include the singular.” Essay sauce, 2017) This part of the actwas designed to help the judges with general words. Nowadays, most statutes containan interpretation section to facilitate the courts. These sections summarieswhat the words contains and how they should be conducted. Statutoryinterpretation The United Kingdomwritten law is known as statute law, also identified as legislation.
These lawsare created and implement by Parliament and enforced by various authorities. Thisassignment has the objective to give a better explanation of statutoryinterpretation and the methodologies associated with it. Moreover, it shows amore comprehensive understanding on how courts use these methodologies tointerpret statutes when is needed. There are three main rules associated onstatutory interpretation described as the literal rule, the golden rule andmischief rule. This assignment will be completed by setting; the reasons forthe courts using these rules will be thoroughly explained.ntroduction