Describe advantages and disadvantages of the golden/mischief/purposive rule (12 marks)

Question 1

Adv of golden rule

Answer 1

Advantages of the Golden Rule
1. Follows Parliament’s Intent (Democratic)
• Judges try to understand what Parliament really meant, not just the exact words.
• This respects democracy because judges apply Parliament’s will.
• Example: In Adler v George, the court didn’t take “in the vicinity” literally because Parliament wouldn’t want a silly result.
2. Avoids Absurd or Unfair Results
• The rule helps judges avoid strange or unfair decisions that could happen if words were taken literally.
• It gives judges a way out when the literal meaning doesn’t make sense.
3. Gives Judges Flexibility
• Judges can use their experience to interpret laws in a way that fits what Parliament wanted.
• This saves Parliament time because judges can fix problems without needing new laws.
• Example: In Adler v George, the judge used this flexibility to avoid an unfair result.

Question 2

DISADV of golden rule

Answer 2

Disadvantages of the Golden Rule
1. Gives Too Much Power to Judges
• Judges are not elected but still make important decisions on how laws are applied.
• Some people say this is undemocratic because judges are changing law, not Parliament.
2. Limited Use
• Judges can only avoid problems in certain situations; they cannot rewrite the law.
• The golden rule is only used after the literal rule, so it doesn’t replace it.
3. Creates Uncertainty
• Different judges might interpret the same law differently.
• This makes it harder for lawyers and people to predict what will happen in court.
• Example: What was decided in Adler v George might be different with another judge.