Golden rule

Golden rule

1. Modification of the literal rule.

2. Judges use the ordinary natural dictionary definition unless this creates absurdity.

   • If absurdity is created judges will apply the narrow or broad application.
     • Narrow application allows judges to choose between possible meanings of word.
     • Broad application allows judges to modify the law by altering the meaning of the word.

3. R v Allen.

   • Offences against the person act 1861.
   • "Whosoever being married shall marry another person during the lifetime of the former husband or wife is guilty of an offence."
   • Literal interpretation of marry is to become legally married so 2nd marriage was never legal.
   • Narrow application found another meaning of marry. So defendant was guilty.
     • "To go through a ceremony of marriage".

4. Lord Reid: "If a word is ambiguous the judge may choose between possible meanings to avoid absurdity but beyond this I would not go."

5. Re Sigsworth.

   • Representation of estates act 1925.
   • "Under the rules of intestacy the son would inherit the mothers estate as an issue."
   • Son killed his mother to inherit her estate.
   • Literal rule would have meant son inherits the estate but courts didn't want murderer to benefit from their crime.
     • Used broad application to modify the meaning of issue.
       • "Son can inherit the estate as an issue so long as they didn't cause the death of their mother."

6. Strengths

   • People are less likely to escape the law on a loophole as the judge can now choose between alternative meanings or modify the word to prevent absurdity from occurring.
   • Prevent the worst situations of the literal rule as it allows judges to make more sensible decisions to avoid unjust ones.

7. Weaknesses

   • Michael zander describes it as a feeble parachute as although it provides an escape route it's still not very flexible. It's so limited there's not much you can do with it.
   • Very limited and rare to use - only when there will be an absurdity.
   • Not predictable when the courts will use this rule.