statutory interpretation

statutory interpretation

1. Once Parliament has passed an Act, it then falls to the courts to apply the statute in a particular case. This can lead to difficulties where the facts of the case may not have been envisaged by Parliament or where there exist drafting errors or ambiguity in the statute. There exists The Interpretation Act of 1978 which provides certain basic definitions such as singular includes plural and he includes she. In addition the courts have developed rules to assist judges in interpreting statutes.

2. The literal rule

   • Dictionary meaning
   • Case: Fisher v Bell [1961]: The defendant had a flick knife displayed in his shop window with a price tag on it. Statute made it a criminal offence to 'offer' such flick knives for sale. His conviction was quashed as goods on display in shops are not 'offers' in the technical sense but an invitation to treat. The court applied the literal rule of statutory interpretation.
     • case: R v Harris (1836) : The defendant bit off his victim's nose. The statute made it an offence 'to stab cut or wound' the court held that under the literal rule the act of biting did not come within the meaning of stab cut or wound as these words implied an instrument had to be used. Therefore the defendant's conviction was quashed.

3. The golden rule

   • The golden rule of statutory interpretation may be applied where an application of the literal rule would lead to an absurdity. The courts may then apply a secondary meaning.
   • Case: R v Allen (1872) : The defendant was charged with the offence of bigamy under s.57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The statute states 'whosoever being married shall marry any other person during the lifetime of the former husband or wife is guilty of an offence'. Under a literal interpretation of this section the offence would be impossible to commit since civil law will not recognise a second marriage any attempt to marry in such circumstances would not be recognised as a valid marriage. Held: The court applied the golden rule and held that the word 'marry' should be interpreted as 'to go through a marriage ceremony'. The defendant's conviction was upheld.
   • Case:Re Sigsworth [1935] : A son murdered his mother. She had not made a will. Under the statute setting the law on intestacy he was her sole issue and stood to inherit her entire estate. The court applied the Golden rule holding that an application of the literal rule would lead to a repugnant result. He was thus entitled to nothing.