Statutory Interpretation

Question 1

Statutory Interpretation

Answer 1

How judges interpret and apply acts of parliament

Question 2

Literal Rule

Answer 2

Lord Esher said “Plain, Ordinary, literal meaning of words”

Question 3

Literal Rule Cases

Answer 3

R v Bentham 2005
Whiteley v Chappell 1868

Question 4

R v Bentham 2005

Answer 4

Bentham was charged under the Firearms Act for POSSESSION of an imitation firearm. He had placed his fingers under his jacket.
The HoL ruled you cannot possess your own fingers

Question 5

Whiteley v Chappell 1868

Answer 5

The act stated was on offence to impersonate someone ENTITLED to vote
D Impersonated dead person
Dead person not entitled to vote
Not Guitly

Question 6

Golden Rule

Answer 6

Established in Becke v Smith 1836 it allows the court to modify the words of the statute if it would produce an absurd result

Question 7

Narrow Golden Rule

Answer 7

Lord Reid in Jones v DPP
If the word is ambiguous the judge may pick one of the meanings

Question 8

R v Allen 1872

Answer 8

Offences against the persona act 1861 makes to offence to marry when already married.
Court realised marry had 2 meanings
1) Ceremony of marriage
2) Legally married
They determined it was absurd as one cannot be legally married if already married. thus they chose the 2nd meaning

Question 9

Wide Golden Rule

Answer 9

The wider application is where there’s only one meaning but it would lead to an absurd or repugnant outcome

Question 10

Re Sigworth 1935

Answer 10

Under the Administration of Estates Act the next of kin would inherit the estate of the deceased.
Sigworth muderded his mother and thus the judge ruled he could not inherit as it would be repugnant

Question 11

Mischief Rule

Answer 11

Hendon’s Case 1584
judges should interpret in a way that achieves the remedy parliament intended

Question 12

Hendon’s Case 1584 Rules (4)

Answer 12

1. Common Law before act
2. Mischief act was designed to remedy
3. What was the remedy Parliament was trying to provide
4. Reason for the remedy

Question 13

Mischief Rule Cases

Answer 13

Smith v Hughes 1960
Corkery v Carpenter 1951
RCN v DHSS 1981

Question 14

Smith v Hughes 1960

Answer 14

Under Street Offences Act soliciting on a public place was an offence. The prostitutes solicited from a private balcony to avoid this.
Judge ruled mischief was people being bothered in the street
Found guiltu

Question 15

Corkery v Carpenter 1951

Answer 15

Charged under licensing act 1872 which made it an offence to be in control of a cartridge while drunk. D was incharge a bicycle
Found Guilty as mischief was to stop drunk people on the road

Question 16

Purposive approach

Answer 16

Modern approach and allows judges to look for purpose of the act judges will try find the intention of parliament

Question 17

Purposive approach cases

Answer 17

R v Registrar-General ex parte Smith 1990
Fitzpatrick v Stirling Housing Association 1999

Question 18

Fitzpatrick v Stirling Housing Association 1999

Answer 18

Under the Rent Act on the death of a tenant, a spouse or family member could take over the tenancy