Parliament passed the Interpretation Act 1978 which makes clear that unless contradiction appears "he" includes "she" and Singular includes plural, this aid helps judges with general words. Statutes also contain Interpretation sections about the types of words used in the statute; this will also help judges to better understand the act of parliament. Statutory interpretation is needed because in Acts of Parliament the words used can be ambiguous or have an unclear meaning or have more then one meaning.Statutory Interpretation is also needed because an Act may have been badly drafted for example the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 where there was confusion over the meaning of "type" whether it meant Breed. This was a key point in the Brock v DPP case (1993), another example is when new developments arise, like in the Yorks v Saddington case (2000) the question of which section to put a "Go-Ped" for the purpose of the Road Traffic Act 1988, whether it be Motorised-Scooter or Motor Vehicle. Statutory Interpretation is also needed because over time language can change the meaning of certain words.
Statutory Interpretation is very important because the interpretation of a word can lead to the justice or injustice in a case. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Aids are also important parts of Statutory Interpretation; because they allow the judges to retrieve a better understanding of what is meant by the Act. Intrinsic Aids are something that is found within the Act of Parliament examples of Intrinsic Aids are; A Long title which are brief to give a moderate description of an Act, A Short Title which states what the Act is i. . Disability Discrimination Act, Headings And Schedules before a group section which shows what the different sections are within the group and also Preamble which sets out Parliaments purpose in enacting the statute. Extrinsic Aids are aids that are outside of the act of parliament which are able to help interpret it.
Some examples of Extrinsic Aids are; Hansard which is a official Parliamentary Report of all proceedings, Dictionaries which will help to understand/find the meaning of the word in question i. e.English Oxford Dictionary, and International Conventions which is regulations or directives which have been implemented in English legislation. The Literal Rule The Literal rule is where the courts will give words their literal meaning even if the result from this would be unreasonable or absurd. This idea of the literal approach was stated by Lord Esher in R V Judge of the City of London Court (1982) where he stated: "if the words of an act are clear then you must follow them even though they lead to a manifest absurdity.
The court has nothing to do with the question whether the legislature has committed absurdity. Case Examples of when the Literal Rule has been used is in Whiteley V Chappell (1868) the defendant was charged under a section for impersonating "a person entitled to vote. " The person who he had been impersonating had died but whose name had still been put onto the voters list. The court found the defendant not guilty because in literal meaning a dead man wasn't "entitled to vote.
" Another good case example is London ; North-Eastern Railway Co. V Berriman (1946) where a railway worker was killed doing maintenance work, oiling points along the railway.His widow tried to claim compensation from the railway company in accordance to the Fatal Accidents Act which stated that a look-out should have been provided for men working on or near the railway line for the purposes of relaying it or repairing it. The court took the words "relaying" and "repairing" in the literal meaning did not involve oiling points along the railway lines, so the claim for compensation failed.
The advantages of using the Literal Rule are that the words that Parliament have written in Act are followed because Parliament are the law making body and judges apply the law exactly how Parliament has written it.Using the literal rule leaves the law making to the elected body and not the unelected judges. Also by using the Literal rule it makes the law more certain, because by it being interpreted how it is written people will know what the Law is and exactly how judges are going to interpret it. The disadvantages of using the Literal Rule are that it is not possible for every Act of Parliament to contain every reason Parliament meant it to.Also by following the Literal Rule Exactly it can lead to Unfair and Absurd decisions.
Another disadvantage is that words can have more then one meaning and would make the Act unclear if the Literal Rule was used. The Golden Rule The Golden Rule is a modification of the Literal Rule. The golden rule starts in the same process as the Literal Rule in interpreting the Act but if the court comes across an Interpretation that would lead to an absurd decision they are able to avoid it by using the Golden Rule.Lord Reid had a very narrow view about the Golden Rule which he expressed in the Jones v DPP (1962) case where he said: "it is a cardinal principle applicable to all kinds of statutes that you may not for any reason attach to a statutory provision a meaning which the words of that provision cannot reasonably bear.
If they are capable of more then one meaning, then you choose between those meanings, but beyond this you cannot go. " An example of a Case that has used the Golden Rule is R v Allen (1872). In this under section 57 of the Offences against the Persons Act 1861 made it an offence to marry if your spouse was still alive.The court interpreted the word "marry" as to get married to another person and also to participate or go through the ceremony of marriage. The court used the second meaning to the word "marry" because the first would have led to an absurd decision and made bigamy legal.
Another example of a case using the Golden rule is Re-Sigsworth (1935) in this case the son had murdered his mother, and his mother had not left a will behind before she was killed. According to the Administration of Justice Act 1925 this meant that her direct next of kin would inherit her issue, which was her son.Although there was no ambiguity in the words of the act, the court was not prepared to allow the son to benefit from his crime by inheriting his mothers issue. The Advantages of the Golden Rule are that it follows the Words written in Acts of Parliament except in limited situations.
Also if there is a problem in using the Literal Rule, then the Golden Rule is available to use as a way out. The Golden Rule gives the judges the opportunity to select the most reasonable meaning of a word in an Act if the word has two meanings. The Golden Rule can lead to reasonable decisions when using the Literal Rule would lead to repugnant ones.The disadvantages of the Golden Rule are that the application of this rule is very limited.
Also it is impossible to predict when the courts are going to use it making areas of the law uncertain. The Mischief Rule The Mischief Rule allows the judges a little more discretion then the other two rules. The Mischief Rule comes from the Heydon's case (1584) where the court should look to see what the law was before the new act was passed in order to see what gap the new Act of Parliament was meant to fill and the court should interpret the Act in regards to the gap in the original act it was meant to cover up.
