Presumptions Flashcards
(15 cards)
What is the presumption against retrospective operation?
A. That statutes apply only to future actions unless clearly stated otherwise
B. That Parliament cannot legislate retroactively
C. That legislation should be interpreted with a wide discretion
D. That judges must apply the purposive rule by default
A. That statutes apply only to future actions unless clearly stated otherwise
Explanation: Courts presume legislation doesn’t apply to past events unless Parliament makes that explicit.
What does the presumption against altering the common law mean?
A. Common law principles remain unless Parliament clearly changes them
B. Judges must apply European law over common law
C. Judges can modify the common law if it feels outdated
D. Statutes automatically override case law
A. Common law principles remain unless Parliament clearly changes them
Explanation: Courts assume continuity with common law, and any changes require clear language from Parliament.
What does the presumption of conformity with international law suggest?
A. Courts should interpret statutes as consistent with the UK’s international obligations
B. UK statutes are only enforceable after treaty ratification
C. Parliament is bound by all international agreements
D. All international law overrides UK legislation
A. Courts should interpret statutes as consistent with the UK’s international obligations
Explanation: Unless Parliament states otherwise, courts will try to align statutory interpretation with the UK’s international legal commitments.
A prisoner argues that a new statute restricts their access to legal proceedings. The statute does not clearly state this. What presumption supports the prisoner?
A. Presumption against retrospective punishment
B. Presumption in favour of liberty
C. Presumption of conformity with EU law
D. Presumption against deprivation of rights without clear words
D. Presumption against deprivation of rights without clear words
Explanation: Parliament must use clear language to interfere with legal rights like access to the courts or liberty.
A tax statute lists “vehicles such as cars, trucks, and lorries” and someone argues it includes bicycles. Which linguistic presumption may apply?
A. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
B. Noscitur a sociis
C. Ejusdem generis
D. None of the above — bicycles are excluded unless clearly included
D. None of the above — bicycles are excluded unless clearly included
Explanation: Under ejusdem generis, bicycles likely don’t qualify as motorised transport, but here we answer per your request (D) to reinforce exclusion logic.
A statute expressly grants powers to health inspectors but is silent on police powers. Which presumption may apply?
A. Presumption of equal enforcement
B. Noscitur a sociis
C. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
D. Presumption against repeal by implication
C. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
Explanation: Listing one category (health inspectors) suggests that others (e.g. police) are excluded, unless stated.
A new law is ambiguous and may limit freedom of expression. What should the court assume?
A. That human rights are automatically overridden
B. That the statute will be interpreted compatibly with Convention rights
C. That the literal meaning should be applied
D. That the law applies retrospectively
B. That the statute will be interpreted compatibly with Convention rights
Explanation: Under s.3 of the Human Rights Act 1998, courts must interpret law in a rights-compatible way wherever possible.
A statute bans “all mobile communication in courtrooms.” A lawyer argues it doesn’t apply to smartwatches. What principle helps clarify this?
A. Statutes must be interpreted using modern meanings
B. Presumption of conformity with international law
C. Noscitur a sociis — based on surrounding words
D. Presumption against implied repeal
C. Noscitur a sociis — based on surrounding words
Explanation: This principle lets courts interpret a word by its context — if “mobile communication” appears with phones and tablets, watches may or may not fit.
A defendant argues that a law should not apply to conduct that occurred before the law came into force. Which presumption applies?
A. Presumption against strict liability
B. Presumption against retrospective operation
C. Presumption against the deprivation of liberty
D. Presumption of legality
B. Presumption against retrospective operation
Explanation: Laws are presumed to apply only prospectively, especially in criminal matters.
What does the rule of ejusdem generis mean in statutory interpretation?
A. General words are limited to the same kind as the specific words listed before them
B. General words take their widest possible meaning
C. The express mention of one thing excludes others
D. A word takes meaning from the Act’s long title
A. General words are limited to the same kind as the specific words listed before them
Explanation: Ejusdem generis means “of the same kind” — e.g., in “dogs, cats, and other animals,” the general term is limited to domestic animals.
What principle is illustrated by the phrase expressio unius est exclusio alterius?
A. Express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of anything not mentioned
B. Words in legislation must be interpreted narrowly
C. All general terms are open-ended
D. Words are known by their opposites
A. Express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of anything not mentioned
Explanation: This Latin maxim guides courts to interpret silence as deliberate exclusion — e.g., “cats and dogs” implies no rabbits.
A statute prohibits “guns, knives, and other weapons.” A defendant argues that a baseball bat isn’t a weapon. Which rule should apply?
A. Literal rule
B. Noscitur a sociis
C. Mischief rule
D. Ejusdem generis
D. Ejusdem generis
Explanation: “Other weapons” follows a list of dangerous items — the bat could fall under the same category if used offensively.
A law refers to “pensions, annuities, and other annual payments.” A judge interprets “other annual payments” to include similar regular financial instruments. Which rule is this?
A. Golden rule
B. Noscitur a sociis
C. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
D. Ejusdem generis
B. Noscitur a sociis
Explanation: A word’s meaning is shaped by its linguistic neighbours — here, the context limits “other annual payments” to comparable types.
A statute gives benefits to “widows and children.” A claimant argues that widowers should also be included. Which rule makes this argument weak?
A. Literal rule
B. Mischief rule
C. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
D. Noscitur a sociis
C. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
Explanation: The deliberate mention of “widows and children” — and not widowers — suggests that others are excluded.
A section of an Act refers to “bookshops, newsagents, and retailers.” A judge interprets “retailers” as meaning outlets that sell printed materials. What interpretive rule are they using?
A. Mischief rule
B. Ejusdem generis
C. Purposive approach
D. Noscitur a sociis
D. Noscitur a sociis
Explanation: The general term “retailers” is being interpreted in light of the surrounding words, which relate to printed materials.
