Untitled

The Literal Rule

1. Judges give words in the Legislation their "plain, ordinary meaning" (Sussex Peerage Case 1844)

2. Lord Esher - R v Judge of City of London

   • "If the words of an Act are clear, you must follow them, even if they lead to manifest absurdity

3. Judge must use the Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

4. LNER v Berriman

   • Oiling did not come under "Relaying or repairing" under the Fatal Accidents Act

5. Whiteley v Chappell

   • D did not literally impersonate a person entitled to vote as dead people are not "entitled to vote"

6. Fisher v Bell

   • Placing flick knives in the window of a shop did not come fall within "offering for sale" in Contract law

7. Cheeseman v DPP

   • Town and Police Clauses Act 1847 Police were not "passengers"

8. Advantages

   • Judges applying will of parliament - democratic
   • Makes cases predictable - less waste of time and money (Berriman)
   • Lawyers can advise clients - less litigation (court action)

9. Disadvantages

   • Rigidity - Judges have no discretion - absurd outcomes
   • English language is often unclear and ambiguous
   • Parliament may have to rectify error - expensive and time consuming
   • The Law Comission 1969 - "assumes unattainable perfection in draftsmanship"
   • Can't be used if words are ambiguous