Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
4 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Literal Rule
|
Interpreting the words of an Act by using their natural, ordinary, dictionary meaning, even if it results in an absurdity
Cases: Whiteley v Chappell, LNER v Berriman, Fisher v Bell (NOTE: Judge can use dictionary from the time of the Act to look up definition e.g Cheeseman - "passenger") |
|
|
Golden Rule
|
Allows judges to avoid using literal interpretation if it produces an absurdity (extension of literal rule)
Cases: Narrow use - R v Allen ("marry") Wider use - Re Sigsworth (son murdered mum and not entitled to her will - "next of kin") |
|
|
Mischief Rule
|
Allows judge to look at the gap/defect in the law that Parliament had felt it necessary to fill by passing the Act. First laid down in Heydon's case. Judges should consider 4 factors:
1. What was the old law before the Act was passed? 2. What was the defect (mischief)? 3. What was Parliament's intention? 4. Act to be interpreted accordingly Cases: Smith v Hughes - hookers on street - Aim of Act was to stop soliciting Royal College of Nursing v DHSS - aim of Act was to prevent backstreet abortions Elliot v Grey - car outside house with no valid insurance policy, broken down months before, engine wouldn't work, no petrol. Using car without valid insurance. "Use" = "have the use of" |
|
|
Purposive Approach
|
Allows judges to examine purpose of Act and interpret doubtful phrases in accordance with that purpose
Cases: Jones v Tower Boot Co. - racism in workplace, act intended employer was liable Quintavalle v Secretary of State - organisms created by cell nuclear replacement come within definition of 'embryo'. CNR wasn't developed when Act was passed but Parliament intended to limit testing on human embryos |
