Tracey Page 2013

AS Law Student Booklet

Law 01 Section A Law-making

Statutory interpretation

Exam info: You must choose one or two of the following subjects to write about in the exam (3x10 mark questions on each – a minute a mark) –

1) Statutory interpretation2) Delegated legislation

1

Tracey Page 2013

NB We will also cover another two subjects in outline but not in enough depth for you to answer those questions in the exam: Parliamentary legislation (Acts) and Judicial Precedent (case law).

2

Tracey Page 2013

Subject 1) Statutory interpretation

Judges follow various rules/approaches when interpreting (explaining the meaning of words) Acts of Parliament (statutes):*Literal rule*Golden rule*Mischief rule*Purposive approach

Judges give the ordinary, dictionary, grammatical meaning to words, (regardless of whether they believe this interpretation will bring about the correct result).

Fill in the gaps – Choose at least 3 of these cases to use as examples in a literal rule essay

Case Brief facts Words that were interpreted

The literal meaning given and the result

DPP v _________________ 1990

A police officer laid in wait in a public toilet, to catch a man who had reportedly been indecently exposing himself to people using the toilets

The Town Police Clauses Act said it was an offence to expose yourself to a “ ____________ ” in the street/public place

“Passenger” literally means someone passing through for the ordinary purposes of a place. The result was that he was___________________Because

Whiteley v ____________1868

A man had been pretending to be someone else (who had died), in order to use their voting card in an election

The Poor Law Amendment Act said it was an offence to impersonate any person who is “entitled to ________”

A person who has died is not literally entitled _____so the result was he was______________

LNER v ___________1946 A man was killed while maintaining (oiling) ____________tracks as there was no look-out provided

The Railway (prevention of accidents) EmploymentAct said compensation would be given if a person was killed while “repairing or relaying” tracks if there was no look-out provided

Repairing or relaying does not literally include __________ tracks so the result was that his widow____________________.

__________v Bell 1961 A shop was displaying a flick-knife with a price-tag in its window

The Restriction of offensive weapons Act said it was an offence to “offer for sale” flick-nives

An offer for sale does not literally include goods in shop windows, according to the laws of_______ so they were __________.

Use the reverse of this page for any additional notes on use of the literal rule

Activities using the literal rule

1) Vehicles exercise:

3

Tracey Page 2013

If an Act said: “No vehicles are permitted in this park.” Discuss with your pair partner whether the following would be allowed into that park using the literal rule:a)A car, b)A lorry, c)A scooter, d)A motorbike, e)A pram, f)A skateboard, g)Roller skates, h) a toy sailing boat Dictionary meaning of vehicle: A structure used to transport people or goods

2) Debate: Using the literal rule would be unfair (unjust) or absurd (daft) because…

On the other hand, the literal rule should be used because…

3) Drugs case:

R v Maginnis 1987- D was found by police to have £500 worth of cannabis resin his car. He said that the package had been left in his car by a friend for collection later.

The Act said it is an offence to be in possession of illegal drugs with intent to supply.

The literal meaning given to supply: furnishing or providing to another something which is wanted or required by them.

Was Mr Maginnis guilty or not guilty and why?

Evaluation of the literal rule (advantages and disadvantages)

1) One advantage of using the literal rule is …

This is an advantage because …

(If relevant) This is shown in the case of…

2) Another advantage of using the literal rule is …

This is an advantage because …

(If relevant) This is shown in the case of…

3) A further advantage of using the literal rule is …

This is an advantage because …

(If relevant) This is shown in the case of…

1) A disadvantage of using the literal rule is…

This is a problem because…

4

Tracey Page 2013

(if relevant) This is shown in the case of …

2) Another disadvantage of using the literal rule is…

This is a problem because…

(if relevant) This is shown in the case of …

3) A further disadvantage of using the literal rule is…

This is a problem because…

(if relevant) This is shown in the case of …

In conclusion – using the literal rule is good because it respects the fact that Parliament is the supreme law-maker in the UK so the words they use in their Acts should be followed exactly. This keeps the law clear and consistent and objective. However, language is ambiguous so which of the ordinary meanings should be used is still subject to each individual judge’s interpretation and sometimes using the literal meaning brings about injustice or absurdity, especially if used in a situation Parliament hadn’t thought of when creating the Act.

If using the literal rule would bring about injustice or absurdity then a judge may use the golden rule instead, where words are given the best meaning to avoid that injustice or absurdity.

The narrow approach is where the word is ambiguous so the judge simply chooses the meaning that brings about the best result. The broad approach is where the word is not ambiguous but the judge chooses not to follow the ordinary meaning but to give the words a new meaning to bring about the best result.

Absurdity means…Ambiguous means…

Use your textbook to fill in the gaps of the first two cases on the golden rule

Case Brief facts Words interpreted

The ‘golden’ meaning given and result

R v Allen 1872 Mr A ____________________________________

The crime of _________is to “marry” someone else when in an existing marriage

“Marry” is ambiguous as it can mean “go through a wedding ceremony” or it can mean “legally marry.” The _______ meaning was given because if the _____ meaning had been given, then it would be impossible to commit the crime of bigamy as nobody can legally marry someone else if they are already married.

Adler v George 1964 The Act made it a crime to obstruct

“In the vicinity” of a place literally means______________________________. This is unambiguous so has only one meaning

5

Tracey Page 2013

military activities “in the vicinity” of the airbase.

but it would be absurd for a person to be guilty just outside the base but not guilty inside it so “in the vicinity” was interpreted to include “inside.”

Re Sigsworth 1935 The Act stated that a person’s “issue” would inherit if they died without leaving a valid will.

“Issue” literally means ________ and this is unambiguous but it would be unjust for a _________ to inherit so the court said “issue” does not include children who killed their parent.

Evaluation (advantages and disadvantages) of the golden rule

Exam tip - Learn the advantages and disadvantages of the literal rule really well as reversing them can form the basis of evaluating all the other rules e.g. If literal respects parliamentary sovereignty then the other rules do not; if it relies too heavily on linguistics then the other rules do not etc.

One advantage of using the golden rule is

This is an advantage because

This was shown in the case of

Another advantage of using the golden rule is

This is an advantage because

A further advantage is

This is an advantage because

One disadvantage of using the golden rule is

This is a disadvantage because

A further disadvantage is

This is a problem because

In summary – the golden rule still respects parliamentary supremacy if the narrow approach is used as it uses the ordinary meaning of the words Parliament chose but it also allows for ambiguity. It also allows judges to take into account the fact that Parliament cannot foresee every situation when they create the Acts as they can give

6

Tracey Page 2013

alternative meanings where the literal meaning would bring about injustice or absurdity. However, the broad approach especially, puts judges into the role of law-makers as they are giving unnatural meanings to words. This makes the law unpredictable and uncertain. It also depends on the subjective opinion of the judge about what results are unjust or absurd.

The mischief rule is the oldest of the interpretation rules, dating from Heydon’s case 1584 which explained several steps to consider when interpreting Acts:1) What was the law before the Act was created?2) What problem or mischief was the Act designed to put right?3) What remedy did the Act provide to put the mischief right?4) What is the true reason for that remedy?

Case Facts Words to be interpreted The interpretation given to avoid the mischief

Smith v Hughes 1960

Elliot v Grey1959

Corkery v Carpenter1951

Evaluation of mischief rule:

One advantage of using the mischief rule is

This is an advantage because

This was shown in the case of

Another advantage of using the golden rule is

This is an advantage because

A further advantage is

7

Tracey Page 2013

This is an advantage because

One disadvantage of using the mischief rule is

This is a disadvantage because

A further disadvantage is

This is a problem because

In summary, the mischief rule is designed to ensure that whatever Parliament intended to put right, is put right so the law is more effective. It does not rely on linguistics and accounts for future applications of the law. However, it relies on the judge’s subjective view of what Parliament must have intended and there is little evidence outside the wording of the Act to confirm that.

Activity on mischief rule:

Look back at Activity 1 in the literal rule – would you answers be different if you used the mischief approach and that mischief was pollution? How about if the mischief was danger to pedestrians?

This is the most recent of the approaches to interpretation and it is really an extension of the mischief rule. The interpretation is given that will bring about the purposes of the Act but there is no need to consider the Heydon’s steps that are required for the mischief rule so can be used even where there was no previous law to refer to. Since EU law is not as precisely worded as UK law, it is useful for interpreting EU law.

Case Facts Words to be interpreted Interpretation givenJones v Tower Boot Co. 1997

The Act made an employer responsible for ensuring racial _______________ did not take place in the work-place. Employees racially abused Mr Jones through remarks and violence. The employer argued that this was not “in the course of_____________” – i.e. they weren’t doing their job by making the remarks.

In the course of employment

‘In the course of _____________was held to include behaviour in the workplace as the purpose of the Act was to provide a ________for discrimination of this kind.

RCN v DHSS 1981

The Act stated that only medical practitioners could perform lawful Medical practitioner –

Medical practitioner was interpreted to include __________ as the

8

Tracey Page 2013

___________.New methods enabled ___________ to carry out abortions.

literally means a ________.

purpose of the Act was to stop “backstreet” abortions, not those in hospital under controlled conditions.

Cutter v Eagle Star Insurance 1998 HL

The victim, a passenger in a stationary car in a multi-storey car park, sustained injuries when lighter fuel that had leaked from the back was ignited by his cigarette.

The Act provided for compensation by the Motor Insurance Bureau to anyone injured by an uninsured driver on a road.

A road.

(A highway/road to which the public has access and enables movement along it to a destination).

The House of Lords overruled the Ct of Appeal decision that a road did include the car park to fulfil the Act’s purpose to compensate those who could not claim against the driver.

A road did not include a ______________as to use a purposive approach to provide compensation would stretch the ordinary meaning too far.

Debate: Was the House of Lords right to overrule the Ct of Appeal in the Cutter case? How far should judges be allowed to stretch the ordinary meanings of words in order to bring about the purposes of the legislation? Should Parliament be advised, instead, to amend an Act if the ordinary meanings of its words do not fulfil its purposes?

Evaluation of purposive approach: This will be pretty much the same as evaluating the mischief rule but with the added advantage that it is useful for interpreting broadly worded EU legislation and that the mechanical Heydon’s steps do not have to be followed, so it can be used where there is no existing case law to refer to.

The disadvantages will be very similar to the mischief rule also, but with an added disadvantage that unnatural meanings may be given to words or words can be entirely missed out or added if necessary to meet the purpose of the Act so this avoids consistency and certainty. It is the subjective view of judges what the purpose of the Act actually was and it does not encourage Parliament to keep its Acts up to date and amended.

Additional notes/questions/problems with STATUTORY INTERPRETATION:

9

Tracey Page 2013

Test yourself

1. List the rules or approaches judges use to help them to understand the meaning of unclear statutes:

2. Define the literal rule & explain how it was used in Whiteley v Chappell.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. Explain one other literal rule case.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Define the Golden rule.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. Using R v Allen explain what the narrow application of the golden rule involves. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

6. How does the case of Adler v George as well as Re Sigsworth illustrate the wider application of the golden rule?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7. What case laid down the mischief rule and what were the factors?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

8. Using the Smith v Hughes case, explain the mischief rule.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

9. Explain the purposive approach and how the facts of Jones v Tower Boot Co illustrate it.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

10

Tracey Page 2013

11