Statutory Interpretation in Law Making

Statutory interpretation refers to the process by which courts interpret and apply legislation passed by Parliament. It is essential because statutes may contain ambiguous language, unforeseen circumstances, or lack clarity, making judicial interpretation necessary to ensure the law is applied as intended. Accurate interpretation upholds the rule of law and prevents injustice.

Literal Rule

The literal rule directs judges to interpret words in their plain, ordinary meaning, regardless of whether the result is sensible or not. This approach respects parliamentary sovereignty by adhering strictly to the text of the statute.

• Features: Focuses on the exact wording; does not consider wider context or intent.
• Example: Whiteley v Chappell (1868): A statute made it an offence to impersonate “any person entitled to vote.” The defendant was acquitted for impersonating a deceased person, as the literal meaning excluded the dead.

Golden Rule

The golden rule allows judges to depart from the literal meaning to avoid absurd or unjust results. It acts as a safety valve for the literal rule’s rigid application.

• Features: Applied narrowly (to avoid absurdity) or broadly (to prevent repugnant outcomes).
• Example: R v Allen (1872): Interpreted “marry” in the Offences Against the Person Act to mean “go through a marriage ceremony,” preventing an absurd outcome under the literal rule.

Mischief Rule

The mischief rule instructs judges to interpret statutes with regard to the “mischief” the Act was intended to remedy. It focuses on the purpose behind the law.

• Features: Considers the law’s intent and the problem Parliament sought to address.
• Example: Smith v Hughes (1960): The Street Offences Act was interpreted to cover prostitutes soliciting from windows, not just the street, as the mischief was public solicitation.

Purposive Approach

The purposive approach looks beyond the text to consider Parliament’s broader purpose in enacting the statute. It is commonly used in interpreting EU law and human rights legislation.

• Features: Focuses on legislative intent; flexible and modern.
• Example: Pepper v Hart (1993): Allowed reference to Hansard (Parliamentary debates) to determine Parliament’s intent.

Intrinsic Aids

Intrinsic aids are clues found within the statute itself that help interpret its meaning.

• Types: Long and short titles, preambles, definitions, schedules, marginal notes.
• Examples: The preamble may set out the Act’s aims; definitions clarify technical terms; schedules provide detailed rules or exceptions.

Extrinsic Aids

Extrinsic aids are materials outside the statute that assist in interpretation.

• Types: Dictionaries, previous statutes, case law, Hansard, international treaties.
• Examples: Hansard may clarify parliamentary debates; dictionaries define words as understood at the time of enactment; previous case law shows how similar wording has been interpreted.

Impact of European Union Law

EU law has encouraged the use of the purposive approach, particularly in areas affected by EU directives. Courts often interpret statutes so as to comply with EU obligations, placing greater emphasis on legislative intent and context.

Human Rights Act 1998: Position and Influence

The Human Rights Act 1998 requires courts to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way compatible with the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. This has led to increased use of the purposive approach, ensuring statutes are read in line with fundamental human rights.

Advantages and Disadvantages

Summary

• Statutory interpretation is vital for clarity and fairness in law making.
• Know the operation, features, and examples of each rule and approach.
• Understand the use of intrinsic and extrinsic aids, with examples.
• Recognise the impact of EU law and the Human Rights Act 1998 on interpretation.
• Be able to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of each method.