Rules of Statutory Interpretation

The Literal Rule

• Takes the usual dictionary meaning of a word
• Follows the principle that the best way to follow Parliament's intentions is by using their words
• Lord Esher stated "If the words of an act are clear, you must follow them"
• Whitely v Chappell
• LNER v Berriman

Advantages & Disadvantages of the

Literal Rule

• Respects Parliamentary sovereignty and the seperation of powers
• Only those elected, ie Parliament, can make Law

• Produces absurd results - Whitely v Chappell and Fisher v Bell
• Produces unjust results - LNER v Berriman
• Does not always give effect to Parliament's intentions
• When there is more than one meaning of a word then the Literal Rule will not suffice

The Golden Rule

• An extension of the Literal Rule
• Made up of two approaches
• Narrow Approach: Allows a Judge to select the meaning of a word to produce the least absurd result - R v Allen
• Broad Approach: Allows a Judge to modify a words meaning to avoid an absurd result - Adler V George, Maddox v Storer

Advantages & Disadvantages of the

Golden Rule

• Prevents absurd and unjust results
• Better follows Parliament's intentions

• No clear definition of what an absurd result is
• Judges have too much power
• Michael Zander describes this rule as a "feeble parachute" used to escape the problems of the Literal Rule

The Mischief Rule

• Looks at a gap in the law which Parliament tried to fill by passing the Act
• The word is interpreted to fill that gap in the law
• Heydon's Case
• Smith v Hughes
• Elliot v Grey

Advantages & Disadvantages of the

Mischief Rule

• Prevents absurd and unjust results
• Promotes flexibility to apply law as intended by Parliament
• The Law Commission described this rule as a "rather more satisfactory approach" than the Literal and Golden Rule

• Gives far too much power to unelected Judges
• It isn't always easy to discover what the mischief was
• It is considered to be out of date as legislation has modernised since the rule was created

The Purposive Approach

• A modern version of the Mischief Rule
• Focuses on what Parliament's intention was when passing the new law
• It's typical of the way EU Law needs to be interpreted, as it's written in broad terms
• This rule seeks to give effect to the true purpose  of the legislation
• Pepper v Hart
• Jones v Tower Boot Co.

Advantages & Disadvantages of the Purposive Approach

• Used in other European countries, so brings the UK into line with the rest of Europe
• Better way of following Parliament's intentions than the Literal Rule

• Gives a huge amount of power to Judges for law making
• Judges can sometimes make decisions based on public policy, which is Parliament's job