Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Law Unit 1
Statutory interpretation
| What is Statutory interpretation? | The process used by Judges to interpret and apply statute to cases |
| What do Judges need to interpret? | Broad terminology Ambiguity Drafting errors New developments Change in the use of language |
| What is the Literal Rule? | Gives words their plain,ordinary & dictionary meaning even if it results in absurdity or the outcome is considered unjust |
| What are 2 examples of absurd out comes from the use of The Literal Rule | Whitley v Chappell Fisher v Bell |
| What happened in the case Whitley v Chappell and what rule was applied | The rule applied was the literary rule Defendant impersonated a dead person.They were found not guilty because the law only states its an offence to impersonate someone entitled to vote and dead people arent. |
| What happened in the case Fisher v Bell and what rule was applied | The rule applied was the literary rule Defendant displayed flick knives in shop window but argued that thye werent for sale but a invitation to track.He was found not guilty as the law startes its and Offence to Sell flick knives not to just display them |
| What is one example of an unjust out come from the use of The Literal Rule | LNER v Berriman |
| What happened in the case LNER v Berriman and what rule was applied | The rule applied was the literary rule A worker was killed while maintaining a train track and a widow didnt recieve compenastion because the Law said that widows can only recieve compensation whilst repairing tracks and he was maintaining |
| What is the golden rule? | Judges use the golden rule to avoid interpretation that would result in a absurd outcome. There are 2 approaches to it: The Narrow Approach The Broad Approach |
| What is the Narrow approach? | When there are multiple meanings to a word and the judge chooses between them |
| What is a case example of The Narrow Approach | Allen |
| What happened in the case Allen | Its an offence to marry again without dissolving first marriage.Defenedant argued that he didnt get married as he didnt sign the papers and only had a ceremony.Judge decided going through a cermony counted as a marriage and found him guilty |
| What is the Broad approach | When the word only has one definition but to apply it would cause an absurdity so the judge modifies the meaning |
| What is a case example of The Broad Approach | Adler v George |
| What happened in the case Adler v George | Its an offence to be in the vicinity of a public area.Defendant argues he wasnt in the vicinity as he was actually inside the prohibited area.Judge decided that in the vicinity included in the actual area using The Broad Approach. |
| What happened in the case Re Sigsworth | Defendant murdered his mother and she hadnt left a will in order to inherit her entire state as under the staute since he was her next or kin he should.The court applied the golden rule as literal wouldve resulted in a repugnant outcome.He was guilty |
| What is the Mischief rule? | Courts should look to see what the Law was before the Act was passed in order to discover the gap or 'mischief' the act designed to cover |
| What us Heydon's case | What the Law was before the staute What was wrong with the law before How does Parilament intend to correct it How does the statute apply in context to the case. |
| What are 2 case examples of the use if The Mischief Rule | Smith v Hughes RNC v DHSS |
| What happened in the case Smith v Hughes | Its an offence to Solicit in a PUBLIC place.Defendants argued that they were soliciting from from private premises.Judge decided that the purpose of the act was to stop soliciting from taking place by using the mischief rule.Defendants were found guity |
| What happened in the case RCN v DHSS | The Abortion act 1967 stated that abortions had to be terminated by a a registered practioner .Due to medical advancements nurses were allowed to carry it out.Judge decided that the purpose of the act was to stop back street abortions. |
| What is the Purposive approach? | Modern day version of the Mischief rule. Used to decide what the purpose of the act is using extrinsic aids. |
| What are two case examples of the use of The Purposive Approach | Exe parte smith Fitzpatrick v SHA |
| What happened in the case Ex Parte Smith | The adoption act stated under 18s was allowed to find out who their bio parents are.Smith was convicted of 2 murders was this refused info Judge decided purpose of the act was to unite families not promite violence |
| What happened in the case Fitzpatrick v SHA | The rent act didnt allow a person in a permanent homosexual relationship to claim succession rights. The court decided this could extend to those who were also in a homosexual relationship |
| Advantages of Literal rule | Judges respect Parliementary Supremacy More democratic More predictable outcome Make Laws consistent |
| Disadvantages of Literal rule | Assumes every rule is correctly drafted Words have more than 1 meaning Can lead to absurdity and unjust decisions |
| Advantages of the Golden rule | Respects Parliamentary Supremacy Prevents problems caused by literal rule Allows the judge to choose the sensible meaning |
| Disadvantages of Golden rule | Unpredictable An absurdity may mean different thing to different judges Unconstitutional Can only be used in limited situations |
| Advantages of Purposive approach | Gives effect to Parliaments true intentions Avoids harsh and destructive analysis Avoids absurdity and injustice |
| Disadvantages of Purposive approach | Can only be used if Judge can find parliaments intention Relies on Extrinsic aids Unconstitutional Judges attitude differ towards trying to find parliamentary intent |
| Advantages of the Mischief rule | Judges have greater flexibility Promotes the purpose of the act Helps achieve Parliamentary intent Removes absurdity and injustice |
| Disadvantages of the mischief rule | Use is limited due to purposive approach Unconstitutional Makes Law uncertain Outdated |
| What are Intrinsic aids | Aids found within the act itself |
| What are 6 intrinsic aids | Long title Preamble Schedules Interpretation section Individual sections/explanatory notes Objective section |
| What is a Long title | Intrinsic aid Referred to as guidance as it has more info about the act |
| What is a Preamble | Intrinsic aid A statement before the main body of the acts purpose found in older statutes They refer to this when they want the aim of the act |
| What is Schedules | Intrinsic aid Additional comments made by parliament found at the back of the act used to make sense of legislation |
| What is the Interpretation section | Intrinsic aid Additional comments made by parliament that appear as marginal notes relating to particular sections |
| What are Individual sections/explanatory notes | Intrinsic aid Modern acts contain a glossary which define and explain meaning of key words used continuously throughout the act |
| What is the Objective section | Intrinsic aids Newer acts contain an objective section which sets up the outcome of the act |
| What are Extrinsic aids | Aids to interpretation found outside the act |
| What are 5 Extrinsic aids | Dictionaries Textbooks Previous acts/Laws International treaties Hansard |
| What is the one case that has to be referred to in an exam question about extrinsic aids | Hansard |
| When may judges refer to Dictionaries | When applying the literary rule |
| When may judges refer to Textbooks | For guidance in relation to particular points of law |
| When may judges refer to Previous acts/Laws | To help understand the development of the law while applying the mischief rule |
| When may judges refer to Internation treaties | They refer to the treaty of rome and the EU convention of Human rights to interpret an act to make sure it doesnt conflict |
| What is Hansard? | Pepper v Hart: H of L"Hansard may be refered to if": The act is amiguous or obscure A literal interpretation would lead to obscurity Only Judges may look at statements made by a minister if its clear |
Created by:
Taanvi