1

English Legal SystemEnglish Legal SystemStatutory Statutory

InterpretationInterpretation

2

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationWho interprets the Statues? Why?Who interprets the Statues? Why?

a) Constitutional role of Judiciary is to a) Constitutional role of Judiciary is to “apply the Law”.“apply the Law”.

c) Creating Law is the Parliament’s Jobc) Creating Law is the Parliament’s Job

Note : The above of course ignores the Note : The above of course ignores the potential for judicial creativity, in relation to potential for judicial creativity, in relation to the operation of the common law and judicial the operation of the common law and judicial precedent & the precedent & the measure of discretion and measure of discretion and creative powere in the manner in which they creative powere in the manner in which they interpret legislation.interpret legislation.

3

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationDifficulties with Interpretations Difficulties with Interpretations

sometimes arise as a result of sometimes arise as a result of the the draftingdrafting

1) 1) draftsman may refrain from using draftsman may refrain from using certain words that he or she certain words that he or she

regards as regards as implied,.or obvious.implied,.or obvious. 2)2) draftsman may use broad term..e.g draftsman may use broad term..e.g

transport - to cover need for transport - to cover need for generalitygenerality

3)3) Ambiguous words may be used Ambiguous words may be used 4)4) There may be unforseeable There may be unforseeable

developmentsdevelopments 5)5) Words may have been left out by Words may have been left out by

mistakemistake

4

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationMethods of InterpretationsMethods of Interpretations

1)1) Literal Approach (Literal Approach (restrictiverestrictive))

: Judges should primarily look at the : Judges should primarily look at the words of the statues in order to words of the statues in order to construe the meaning.construe the meaning.

2)2) Purposive Approach Purposive Approach ((permissivepermissive))

: Powers to look beyond mere words : Powers to look beyond mere words and to look at the reason for its and to look at the reason for its enactment.enactment.

5

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationMethods of InterpretationsMethods of Interpretations

1)1) Literal Approach (Literal Approach (restrictiverestrictive))English legislation is drafted with the English legislation is drafted with the intent that the literal approach would intent that the literal approach would be used.be used.Unlike European legislation.Unlike European legislation.

Shah V Barnet London Borough (1983)Shah V Barnet London Borough (1983)

: The literal approach should be used : The literal approach should be used unless a clear statement of the unless a clear statement of the

purpose purpose is mentioned in the statute and is mentioned in the statute and reference is made to extrinsic reference is made to extrinsic

materials.materials.

6

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationMethods of InterpretationsMethods of Interpretations

1)1) Purposive approachPurposive approach

Pickstone V Freemans (1988) HLPickstone V Freemans (1988) HL

Its permitted to use the Its permitted to use the purposive purposive approach especially if approach especially if European European community laws are community laws are interpreted and if interpreted and if an English an English stature has to be referred in stature has to be referred in the the light of European legislation.light of European legislation.

7

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationRules of Interpretation : Must be done Rules of Interpretation : Must be done in the light of the in the light of the Human Right Act Human Right Act

1998.(ECHR)1998.(ECHR)Thus powers of interpretation become wider then usual

1) 1) literal Rule -literal Rule - What the legislation actually What the legislation actually says (not what it might mean)says (not what it might mean)

2) 2) The golden Rule -The golden Rule - If application of the literal If application of the literal rule might produce absurd resultrule might produce absurd result

3) 3) The Mischief Rule - The Mischief Rule - What it intended to correct.What it intended to correct.

8

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationLiteral Rule :Literal Rule :

What legislation actually says.What legislation actually says. Give words in the legislation its literal Give words in the legislation its literal

meaning. Simple words..everyday meaning.meaning. Simple words..everyday meaning. Even if it results in an unjust or undesirable Even if it results in an unjust or undesirable

outcome.outcome. Follow the wishes of parliament ?Follow the wishes of parliament ? Literal meaning from dictionary or legal Literal meaning from dictionary or legal

meaning?meaning? Fisher V Bell (1961)Fisher V Bell (1961) : The word offer for sale, : The word offer for sale,

was interpreted as “offer” in the law of was interpreted as “offer” in the law of contract.contract.

Patridge V CrittendenPatridge V Crittenden(1968) : Same (1968) : Same interpretation for the word offer in statuteinterpretation for the word offer in statute

9

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationLiteral RuleLiteral Rule : : More problemsMore problems

Literal meaning of words ?Literal meaning of words ?R V Maginnis (1987)R V Maginnis (1987)

D charged with Misuse of Drugs Act 1971,.,having D charged with Misuse of Drugs Act 1971,.,having drugs in possesion”with intent todrugs in possesion”with intent to supply supply them”. them”.He claimed that since he had intentions to return He claimed that since he had intentions to return the drugs to a friend who had left them in his car, the drugs to a friend who had left them in his car, he could not be guilty ofhe could not be guilty of supplying supplying as charged.as charged.H/L : all the lords were looking for the best literal H/L : all the lords were looking for the best literal (dictionary) meaning to the word supplying.(dictionary) meaning to the word supplying.

10

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationGolden ruleGolden rule : :

River Wear Comrs V Adamson(1877)River Wear Comrs V Adamson(1877)as per Lord Blackburn :as per Lord Blackburn :

“ “ We are to take the statute and We are to take the statute and construe it all together giving the words construe it all together giving the words their ordinary signification, unless, when their ordinary signification, unless, when so applied they produce produce an so applied they produce produce an inconsistensy or an absurdity or inconsistensy or an absurdity or inconvenience…”inconvenience…”

11

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationGolden rule : 2 versionsGolden rule : 2 versions

1)1) Narrow meaningNarrow meaning : :Adler V George (1964)Adler V George (1964)D, charged under the official secrets act 1920, with D, charged under the official secrets act 1920, with

the the obstruction “in the vicinity” of a prohibited area, obstruction “in the vicinity” of a prohibited area, whereas she had carried out the obstruction whereas she had carried out the obstruction

“inside the “inside the area”.area”.The court decided not to restrict itself to the The court decided not to restrict itself to the less less absurd meaningabsurd meaning and found D guilty. and found D guilty.

2)2) Wider meaningWider meaning : :R V Sigsworth(1935)R V Sigsworth(1935)Only one possible meaning but choose not to Only one possible meaning but choose not to

accept it.accept it.But the court cannot ignore or replace the But the court cannot ignore or replace the

legislative legislative rule just because it disagrees with the rule just because it disagrees with the provisionprovision..

12

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationMischief RuleMischief Rule

The most flexible rule : yet the following test to apply:The most flexible rule : yet the following test to apply:

Heydon’s Case (1584)Heydon’s Case (1584)

The following must be considered before the mischief The following must be considered before the mischief rule can be applied to statutory interpretation :rule can be applied to statutory interpretation :

1) What was the common law before the passing of the 1) What was the common law before the passing of the statue?statue?

2) What was the mischief in the law which the common 2) What was the mischief in the law which the common law did not adequately deal with?law did not adequately deal with?

3) What remedy for the mischief had parliament 3) What remedy for the mischief had parliament intended to provide?intended to provide?

4) What was the reason for the parliament adopting 4) What was the reason for the parliament adopting the remedy?the remedy?

13

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationMischief RuleMischief Rule

Heydon’s CaseHeydon’s Case : Look at the purpose of the act. : Look at the purpose of the act.

Note : It was the practice at 1584, to cite in the Note : It was the practice at 1584, to cite in the preamble of legislation the purpose for its enactment, preamble of legislation the purpose for its enactment, including theincluding the mischiefmischief at which it was aimed. at which it was aimed.

Corkery V Carpenter (1950)Corkery V Carpenter (1950)A man was found guilty of being drunk in charge of a A man was found guilty of being drunk in charge of a “carriage” although he was in fact only in charge of a “carriage” although he was in fact only in charge of a bicycle.bicycle.

Royal College of Nursing V DHSS (1981)Royal College of Nursing V DHSS (1981)Held : medical induction to labour is under the Held : medical induction to labour is under the supervision of nursing staff was lawful : It was held that supervision of nursing staff was lawful : It was held that the medical induction of labour by the nurse’s was the medical induction of labour by the nurse’s was legally done by a “medical practitioner”. legally done by a “medical practitioner”.

14

Statutory InterpretationStatutory Interpretation

Aids to ConstructionAids to ConstructionSecondary aids to construction :Secondary aids to construction :

1)1) intrinsic assistanceintrinsic assistanceFrom the From the statute itselfstatute itself,…preamble, ,…preamble,

long title long title headings,..etc.headings,..etc.

15

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationAids to ConstructionAids to Construction

2)2) Extrinsic assistanceExtrinsic assistanceReference to sources outside the Act.Reference to sources outside the Act.

E.g. Dictionaries, textbooks, earlier statutesE.g. Dictionaries, textbooks, earlier statutes

See Interpretation Act 1978See Interpretation Act 1978e.g. male refers to female also etc.e.g. male refers to female also etc.

Bill of ParliamentBill of Parliament

Law commission reportsLaw commission reports

See Pepper V Hart H/LSee Pepper V Hart H/LHeld : courts could look at Hansard’s report of Held : courts could look at Hansard’s report of

parliamentary proceedings to look at parliamentary proceedings to look at mischief to be mischief to be corrected.corrected.

16

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationAids to ConstructionAids to Construction

Pepper V HartPepper V Hartfollowed in the case of followed in the case of

Three Rivers District Council V Bank of Three Rivers District Council V Bank of England(1996) :England(1996) :

:in short, reference may be made to the :in short, reference may be made to the Hansard to find out the purpose behind the Hansard to find out the purpose behind the legislation only if the literal and golden rule legislation only if the literal and golden rule cannot be applied. cannot be applied.

i.e if literally it would be absurd or the i.e if literally it would be absurd or the statute is ambiguous.statute is ambiguous.

17

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationPresumptionsPresumptions

Notes : The following presumptions may be Notes : The following presumptions may be used in addition to the rules of interpretation.used in addition to the rules of interpretation.

(But presumptions can be rebutted of course)(But presumptions can be rebutted of course) 1) 1) Against the alteration of the common law, unless Against the alteration of the common law, unless

expressly stated.expressly stated.

2) 2) That a mental element is required for criminal That a mental element is required for criminal

offences.offences.

See Sweet V Parsley (1970).HLSee Sweet V Parsley (1970).HL Premises for Premises for smoking cannabis. Dangerous drugs act smoking cannabis. Dangerous drugs act

19651965 3)3) Against retrospective effect of new law.Against retrospective effect of new law.

4) 4) Presumption against deprivation of libertyPresumption against deprivation of liberty

18

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationPresumptionsPresumptions

Cases on mental element presumption :Cases on mental element presumption :

Sweet V Parsley (1970) HL : Sweet V Parsley (1970) HL : as per Lord Reid,as per Lord Reid,

“ “ When a section is silent as to mens rea…there is a When a section is silent as to mens rea…there is a presumption that we must read in words requiring mens presumption that we must read in words requiring mens rea”rea”

But see :But see :

R V Hussain (1981) CA : Held : R V Hussain (1981) CA : Held : Possessing of firearm Possessing of firearm stict liability offence, where mens reas was not required stict liability offence, where mens reas was not required to be proved.to be proved.

R V Brandish (1990) Held: R V Brandish (1990) Held: possession of prohibited possession of prohibited weapon (canister of CS gas)..was strict liability offence.weapon (canister of CS gas)..was strict liability offence.

19

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationAgainst retrospective effect of new Against retrospective effect of new

lawlaw

Laws cannot be applied Laws cannot be applied retrospectively.retrospectively.

Exception :Exception : Statutes may be passed that Statutes may be passed that

can do can do that but it must be that but it must be specified clearlyspecified clearly

20

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationThe War Damage Act 1965The War Damage Act 1965

was passed specifically to overrule the decision was passed specifically to overrule the decision of the House of Lords in of the House of Lords in Burmah Oil Co Ltd V The Lord Advocate(1965)Burmah Oil Co Ltd V The Lord Advocate(1965)Facts : The oil company installations in Burma, which Facts : The oil company installations in Burma, which was then a British Colony had been destroyed by the was then a British Colony had been destroyed by the British Forces in 1942, in order to prevent them being British Forces in 1942, in order to prevent them being captured by Japanese forces.captured by Japanese forces.The co. that was registered in Scotland sued the crown The co. that was registered in Scotland sued the crown for compensation.for compensation.Held :Held : HL held that the govn should pay. HL held that the govn should pay.

The statute was passed to overrule the The statute was passed to overrule the House of Lords and to stop the payment House of Lords and to stop the payment

of the compensation.of the compensation.

21

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationThe war crimes act 1991The war crimes act 1991

This act allowed the attorney general to This act allowed the attorney general to authorise criminal proceedings for homicide authorise criminal proceedings for homicide committed in Germany or German occupied committed in Germany or German occupied territory during the second world war.territory during the second world war.

The prosecution can be anyone in UK, The prosecution can be anyone in UK, regardless of nationality at the time of the regardless of nationality at the time of the alleged offence.alleged offence.

22

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationPresumption that it does not apply to Presumption that it does not apply to the crownthe crown

Unless stated clearly the legislation would not Unless stated clearly the legislation would not apply to the crownapply to the crown

Presumption against breaking Presumption against breaking international lawinternational law

23

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationIn March 2001, The Law commission of England In March 2001, The Law commission of England and Wales, raised the prospect of a second trial and Wales, raised the prospect of a second trial of the men accused of murdering theof the men accused of murdering the black black teenagerteenager Stephen LawrenceStephen Lawrence, by calling the , by calling the ““double Jeopardy” law to be relaxed for murder double Jeopardy” law to be relaxed for murder cases, where there is compelling evidence.cases, where there is compelling evidence.

So, if the CPS wants to bring fresh prosecutions So, if the CPS wants to bring fresh prosecutions against the suspects it could do so, if the parliament against the suspects it could do so, if the parliament passes the law.passes the law.

24

Statutory InterpretationStatutory Interpretation

Presumption against deprivation of LibertyPresumption against deprivation of Liberty The courts interpret statutes on an assumption The courts interpret statutes on an assumption

that it could not have intended to deprive the that it could not have intended to deprive the

liberty of anyone unless specifically stated.liberty of anyone unless specifically stated.R v Secretary of State for Home deparment ex p R v Secretary of State for Home deparment ex p Khawaja (1983)Khawaja (1983)HL Held : The immigration act in the case did not have the HL Held : The immigration act in the case did not have the effect of placing the burden of proof on an immigrant to show effect of placing the burden of proof on an immigrant to show that the that the decision of the home office to detain him was decision of the home office to detain him was unjustified.unjustified.

25

Statutory InterpretationStatutory InterpretationPresumption that words should be interpreted Presumption that words should be interpreted taking their meaning from the context in which taking their meaning from the context in which they are used :they are used :There are three sub rules to the above.There are three sub rules to the above.

noscitur a sociisnoscitur a sociise.g. a chain of words should be interpreted in e.g. a chain of words should be interpreted in

relation to each otherrelation to each other ejusdem generisejusdem generis e.g horses, cattle, sheep ande.g horses, cattle, sheep and other animalsother animals see Powell v Kempton Park racecourse(1899)see Powell v Kempton Park racecourse(1899) expressio unius exclusio alteriusexpressio unius exclusio alterius If contains list of words, then whatever is not If contains list of words, then whatever is not

stated,.. is excludedstated,.. is excluded