statutory interpretation
- Created by: georgiacalcottxx
- Created on: 19-04-23 11:16
View mindmap
- statutory interpretation
- the need for statutory interpretation
- a broad term
- there may be word designed to cover several possibilities
- dangerous dogs act 1991
- 'type' is broad term. in Brock v dpp they said it was a wider term.
- dangerous dogs act 1991
- there may be word designed to cover several possibilities
- ambiguity
- this is where a word has two or more meanings
- a drafting error
- may be an error which has not been noticed by parliament or where it has been amended several times
- new developments
- new technology may mean old acts do not apparently cover present day situations
- royal college of nursing v dhss where medical methods had changed
- new technology may mean old acts do not apparently cover present day situations
- changes in the use of language
- meanings can change over time
- a broad term
- the three rules
- the literal rule
- courts will give words their plain ordinary dictionary or literal meaning regardless of the outcome
- whitley v chappell - absurd decision because it did the opposite of what the law is supposed to do.
- london and north eastern railway co v berriman - applying literally led to unjust decision
- the golden rule
- court is allowed to avoid an interpretation which would lead to an absurd result
- narrow approach
- choosing the most suitable meaning
- jones v dpp - court may only choose between possible meanings of a word or phrase
- wide approach
- changing the word or meaning to avoid absurd result
- RE sigsworth - 'issue' of a dead person would not be entitled to inherit where he had killed the person he is inheriting from
- changing the word or meaning to avoid absurd result
- mischief rule
- court should look to see what gap or 'mischief' the act was intended to cover and interpret the act in such a way that the gap in common law is covered.
- smith v hughes - judge was looking at not the wording of 'in a street or public place' but the gap intended to be covered.
- the literal rule
- purposive approach
- judges decide what they believe parliament was trying to achieve.
- therefore they are allowed to consider broader context of the act being created
- used by many European nations like the court of justice of European union.
- r v registrar-general ex parte smith
- r v human fertilisation and embryology authority
- judges decide what they believe parliament was trying to achieve.
- aids to interpretation
- intrinsic aids
- long title short title or preamble can be cosidered.
- preamble sets out parliaments purpose of enacting the statute.
- some will have interpretation or definition section where they will give meanings and sometimes extended meanings.
- headings before sections and marginal notes explaining different sections are not generally giving intention as they are inserted after debates.
- look at the other sections of the act may also aid as in harrow lbc v shah and shah
- extrinsic aids
- dictionaries and textbooks from the time of the passing
- the historical context of the act
- hansard
- official report of what was said in parliament when the act was debated
- pepper v hart - hansard may be used but only where the words of the act are ambiguous, obscure or lead to absurdity.
- reports of law reform bodies
- law commission is the body who recommend reform where it is needed
- black-clawson - such reports should be looked at to discover the mischief or gap in the law the legislation is based on.
- law commission is the body who recommend reform where it is needed
- original versions of international conventions
- fothergill v monarch airlines - the original convention should be considered as in tanslating or adapting the meaning could have been lost.
- intrinsic aids
- the effect of EU law on statutory interpretation
- purposive approach most preferred in European countries, has been adopted by the European union law.
- effected English courts in two ways
- had to accept that for law which has been passed as a result of having to conform to an EU law, the purposive approach is the correct one.
- judges have had to use it for EU law for over 40 years and has made them more accustomed to it and therefore more likely to be applied to English law therefore even though we left the EU English judges are likely to continue to use it.
- effected English courts in two ways
- interpreting EU law
- where the law is based on eu law the english courts have previously had to interpret it in the light of the wording and purpose.
- treaty of Rome - set out the duties of European union members states requiring them to 'take all appropriate measures... to ensure fulfilment of the obligations'
- where the law is based on eu law the english courts have previously had to interpret it in the light of the wording and purpose.
- purposive approach most preferred in European countries, has been adopted by the European union law.
- the need for statutory interpretation
Comments
No comments have yet been made