If a judge uses this rule this means they are applying the “plain and ordinary” meaning of the statute presented to them, no matter even if the outcome would be “absurd”
2 of 18
LNER V Berriman
rail worker killed on tracks whilst “oiling and maintaining” but company not liable due to the statute “Fatal accidents act” stating it needed to be “relaying or repairing”
3 of 18
Cheeseman V DPP
Cheeseman was masturbating in toilets however statute states “It is an offence to wilfully and indecently expose one’s person in a street to the annoyance of passengers” as the policeman who was stationary in the toilet was not a “passenger” then thi
4 of 18
What is the Golden Rule (Narrow Approach)?
“The judge may choose between possible meanings of an ambiguous word or phrase and select the most appropriate meaning to fit the case.” but cannot create a new meaning
5 of 18
What word needed the use of the narrow approach in R v Allen and why?
“Marry” can mean to legally marry or to go through a marriage ceremony. The word 'marry' should be interpreted as “to go through a marriage ceremony”.
6 of 18
Why did the Narrow Approach need to be used?
this would lead to the absurd result that nobody could ever be guilty of the offence as it is a “legal marriage”.
7 of 18
What is the Golden Rule (Broad Approach)?
the judge can “This approach is used where the words of a statute have only one clear meaning but using it would lead to an absurd or wrong outcome. This approach allows a judge to modify the words of a the statute to avoid the absurd result.”
8 of 18
Re Sigworth Case Facts
Son kills D (mother) for inheritance argues “when a person dies inestate, their next of kin inherits this estate.” However, using the broad approach the judge added “but you cannot benefit from a crime” to stop an unjust decision.
9 of 18
What is the Mischief Rule?
The Judges identify the Mischief Parliament was trying to solve and Interpret the statute to prevent the mischief
10 of 18
What is the main message of Heydon's Case?
What was the law before the statute was made?
11 of 18
What was the Offence in Cokery V Carpenter?
Being drunk in charge of a carriage
12 of 18
What was the Mischief this statute tried to eliminate?
road users being killed/ injured by other road users Interpretation: Bike is a carriage and still causes the mischief, resulting in a Guilty Verdict
13 of 18
What is the Purposive Approach and why is it used?
Goes beyond mischief rule because it doesn't just look to see what gaps there were in the old law it considers the “purpose” of Parliament - what did Parliament intend to achieve by passing the Act?
14 of 18
Jones V Tower Boot Company facts
Jones was being harassed physically and verbally by colleagues due to his race (Mixed race)
15 of 18
What Statute needed Interpreting in this case?
Race Relations act
16 of 18
What Phrase needed Interpreting?
“In the course of employment”
17 of 18
What was the verdict and why?
“In the course of employment” literally means anything to do with the actual job. However, the Purpose of the act was to improve relations between races in the workplaces which meant this resulted in a Guilty Verdict
18 of 18
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
What is the Literal Rule?
Back
If a judge uses this rule this means they are applying the “plain and ordinary” meaning of the statute presented to them, no matter even if the outcome would be “absurd”
Comments
No comments have yet been made