Statutory Interpretation

Flashcards for reviewing statutory interpretation lecture notes.

Statutes

A fundamental source of law, with the UK Parliament passing approximately 60 Acts each year.

R v Bentham [2005]

Defendant broke into his old boss’ house to rob him. Used his hand inside his jacket forcing the material to give the impression he had a gun. Convicted of robbery and possessing a firearm during a robbery.

R v Bentham - HOL

Rules of statutory construction have a valuable role when the meaning of a statutory provision is doubtful, but none where the meaning is plain.

Why is there a need for Statutory Interpretation?

Language used in statutes is often complex and imprecise, with sentence construction being over elaborate and drafting not covering every eventuality.

When the meaning of a statute is uncertain or ambiguous, what is the job of the courts?

To discover how Parliament intended the law to apply the law; and put that into practice.

Why are broad terms a cause for interpretation?

Words designed to cover several possibilities lead to the problem of how wide this should go.

Powell v Kempton Racecourse [1897]

The court applied the ejusdem generis rule and held that the other items mentioned in the statute related to places indoors whereas Tattersall's enclosure was outside.

Brock v DPP ( 1993)

Court held that “type” had a wider meaning than “breed”; could cover dogs who were not pedigree pit bull terriers but had a substantial number of the characteristics of such a dog.

R v Allen (1872)

The court applied the golden rule and held that the word 'marry' should be interpreted as 'to go through a marriage ceremony'.

Why do drafting errors create a need for Statutory Interpretation?

The Parliamentary Counsel who drafted the original Bill may have made an error which has not been noticed by Parliament; punctuations, spelling, capitalization

How do new developments create a need for statutory interpretation?

New technology may mean that an old Act of Parliament does not apparently cover present-day situations. In Royal College of Nursing v DHSS [1981] 1 All ER 545

Literal Rule

Concentrates on actual words used. “If words of the statute are in themselves precise and unambiguous, then no more can be necessary than to expound those words in the natural and ordinary sense”

United Biscuits (1991) LON/91/160

Under the Value Added Tax Act 1983, Section 16, Schedule 5, Group 1, “Food" i.e. "food of a kind used for human consumption" includes "confectionery (not cakes) and biscuits wholly or partly covered with chocolate or with some product similar in taste and appearance". United Biscuits claimed that Jaffa Cakes should qualify as a cake.

R v The City of London Court (1892) 1 Q.B. 273

If the words of the Act are clear, you must follow them even though they lead to a manifest absurdity.

Fisher v. Bell (1960)

Bell, a shopkeeper, “displayed with price tag” a flick knife in his shop window but had not sold any. The Law said “selling flick knives to another is an offence”. Held: Bell merely “displayed” amounting to invitation to treat, instead of selling/offering to sell a flick knife. Thus, not guilty.

Whiteley v Chappell [1868]

D was charged under a section which made it an offence to impersonate ‘any person entitled to vote’. D had voted using a dead person’s name. The Court held D was NOT guilty since a dead person is not, in the literal meaning of the word, ‘entitled to vote’ .

What is an advantage of the Literal Rule?

Follows the words of Parliament. Parliament is our law-making body and it is therefore correct that judges should apply the law as written by Parliament without changing it.

How does the Literal Rule encourages certainty in the law.

Using the literal rule will make the law more certain as the law will be interpreted exactly as it is written every time that it is used.

How does the Literal Rule encourages precision in drafting?

Words used in the drafting are given the plain and ordinary meaning Hence, judges apply the words as it appears in the statute.

What is a disadvantage of the literal rule?

following the literal meanings of the words in the Act can also lead to unfair and unjust decisions like the one in London & North Eastern Railway Co. v Berriman.

Criticism of the literal rule: London & Northeastern Railway Co v Berriman (1946)

The Fatal Accidents Act needed interpretation. a railway worker was killed while oiling points on a railway line. His widow tried to claim compensation because no look-out man had been provided. Court took the words “relaying’ and ‘repairing” in their literal meaning and said that oiling points was maintaining the line and not relaying or repairing, so the claim failed.

The Golden Rule

… (first) we are to take the whole statute together, and construe it all together, giving the words their ordinary signification (meaning), unless when so applied they produce an inconsistency or absurdity … so great as to convince the court that the intention could not have been to used them in their ordinary signification, (then) to justify the court in putting on them some other signification …

What does the Golden Rule do when there is ambiguity in the word/s being interpreted?

Where there is ambiguity in the word/s being interpreted the court will try to avoid reaching an absurd conclusion by: (1) Reject the literal approach (2) Giving word/s a secondary meaning that could lead to a common sense interpretation

When is the golden Rule useful?

The Golden Rule is only useful where there is a patent ambiguity in the words used; and the words in dispute are capable of bearing a secondary meaning.

What does the Golden Rule provide?

Provides that if the literal rule gives an absurd result, which Parliament could not have intended, then (and only then) the judge can substitute a reasonable meaning in the light of the statute as a whole.

Re Sigsworth (1935)

The son murdered his mother. The mother died intestate, so normally her estate would be inherited by her next of kin . The court was not prepared to let a murderer benefit from his crime, so it was held that the literal rule should not apply, and the golden rule would be used to prevent the repugnant situation of the son inheriting.

Lee v Knapp [1967]

The Act required that a motorist "stop" after an accident. The defendant claimed that he did in fact momentarily halt, before proceeding, therefore complying with a commonly accepted literal meaning of "stop". The judge found that in this circumstance "stop" meant halt and wait for police or other officials to investigate the accident tobtain information from the drive.

The Mischief Rule

Disregards actual word/s used if it leads to absurdity; Concentrates of finding Parliament’s intention when passing the Act

Heydon’s Case (1584): consider the following.

What was the common law before the Act? What was the mischief/defect the common law did not provide? What was the remedy that Parliament wanted to resolve? What was the reason for the remedy? Then the judge must make the construction to remedy the defect

Smith v Hughes (1960)

The defendants were charged with ‘soliciting in a street or public place for the purposes of prostitution’ contrary to the Street Offences Act 1959. However, they were soliciting from an upstairs windows.

Smith v Hughes (1960)

Interpreted s 1(1) of the Street Offences Act 1959 which said “ it shall be an offence for a common prostitute to loiter or solicit in a street or public place for the purpose of prostitution”. the court decided that the women who were soliciting from windows were guilty, because the act was trying to clean up the streets.

What is an advantage of the Mischief Rule?

Look beyond words; Courts consider why the Act was passed

Royal College of Nursing v DHSS

Royal College of Nursing v DHSS [1981] 1 All ER 545 .The wording of the Abortion Act 1967, which provided that no criminal offence was committed “where a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner” .

The European Approach: Purposive Approach

Adopted by the European Court of Justice in interpreting European law. An approach where the court seeks to give effect to the true purpose of legislation

Purpose Approach- Pre Brexit

Where the law to be interpreted is based on European Law, the court must interpret it in the light of the wording and purpose of European law.

Purpose Approach- SI Post Brexit

After the UK's departure from the EU, the interpretation of retained EU law is no longer guided by EU principles of interpretation, and domestic legislation takes precedence over any conflicting retained EU regulations.

Aids to statutory interpretation

What materials can the judge draw upon to assist him in interpretation of statute? What about materials that are produced as a result of the legislative process itself?

Pre Pepper v Hart [1993]: The exclusionary rule

Hansard could not be used Because of the doctrine of separation of powers: • Parliament makes the law • Courts are to interpret the law according to the words expressed in the Act

Pepper v Hart [1993]

established the principle that when primary legislation is ambiguous then, under certain circumstances, the court may refer to statements made in the House of Commons or House of Lords in an attempt to interpret the meaning of the legislation.

Pepper v Hart

Brief facts: Hart and nine others were teachers at Malvern College who benefited from a concessionary fee scheme that allowed their children to be educated at the college for one fifth of the normal fees of a pupil.

Rule in Pepper v Hart

Hansard (Parliamentary proceedings records) can be consulted to ascertain the intention of Parliament provided Words of the Legislation is ambiguous/obscure or leads to an absurdity

Hardinge v Wealands [2006] UKHL 32

Rule in Pepper v Hart: ministerial statements are useful as an interpretative aid

Ejusdem Generis

General words which follow specific words are taken to include things of the same kind ‘dogs, cats and other animals’ – ‘other animals’ includes other domestic animals and not wild animals

Noscitur A Sociis

When a word or phrase is of uncertain meaning, it should be construed in the light of the surrounding words (i.e its related meaning and interpreted in relation to each other).

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius

Express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another ‘Persian cats’ – implies that it does not include other types of cats

In Pari Materia

Laws of the same matter and on the same subject must be construed with reference to each other.

Do courts interpret statute to reflect changing social condition?

Asked the question of how courts interpret statutes to reflect changing social conditions and gave examples.

Dyson Holdings v Fox [1976] QB 503

Held, the Tribunal had to decide whether or no that popular meaning covers the case in hand.

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2004] UKHL 30

that survivorship rights in respect of statutory tenancies apply to cohabiting same-sex couples, and not just to those who lived together as husband and wife.

Human Rights Act 1998

To give effect to rights and freedoms guaranteed under the ECHR

ECHR and HRA 1998: Section 3

So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.

Are there rules?

Interpretive criteria which must be figuratively weighed and balanced.

Does Parliament give any guideline to courts?: A. The Interpretation Act 1978

It contains certain standard definitions e.g. ‘single includes plural’ and ‘he includes she’; narrow in scope