What are the rules of interpretation?

Answer 1

== == They are rules used by the courts to interpret the meaning of an Act.They are necessary because the meanings of an Act can be unclear, and these "rules" are used to make a judge's task of reaching a clear understanding of an Act, much easier.

There are four rules: # The literal rule # The Golden rule # The Mischief rule # The Purposive approach

Answer 2

By P.K.

The Literal Rule The literal rule is used by judges to look at the literal meaning of words in an Act. Lord Escher expressed similar views to this rule in R V Judge of the City Of London Court saying "if the words of an Act are unclear you must follow them even though they lead to a manifest absurdity"

The Golden Rule

The golden rule also looks at the literal meaning of words of an Act but allows the court to avoid an interpretation which may lead to an absurd result.

Their are two applications of the golden rule:

1.The Narrow apllication

This is used when there are ambiguous words involved in the Act, and this application allows the court to choose the most suitable meaning of the ambiguous word/phrase to avoid an absurd decision from occuring. (example of use in: R v Allen)

2.The Broad/wider application

This application is used when words in an Act have one clear meaning, but that meaning would lead to a repugnant situation (Such as in the case of Re Sigworth) and the golden rule will then be used to change the words in the Act to avoid this situation from occuring.

The Mischief Rule

Derives from Heydons Case and involves looking at Parliament's intention for the Act, by determining the defect that the statute in question is trying to remedy.

(Used in Smith V Hughes)

The purposive approach

This rule goes further than the mischief rule in that it not only allows judges to look at the defect that the statute in question is trying to remedy, but also it allows judges to decide what they believe parliament wanted to achieve. (it creates more scope for undemocratic law making).

This rule was used in R (Quintavalle) v Secretary of State.

Answer 3

literal rule of interpretation of statute provides that language of the statute should b interpreted in its ordinary, grammatical and literal sense....the in court in order to ascertain the meaning of language used in the statute and to determine the intention of the legislature applies literal rule of interpretation.....the literal rule should b applied to every text and clause of the statute and the statute should be made effective but the court should not apply the rule where it found that language and the words of the statute give a clear meaning.

Answer 4

Interpretative rules are rules formulated by agencies in the form of memos, handbooks, or speeches. They are often a significant source of information about how the agency will exercise its delegation of authority. Interpretative rules are not usually the product of a specific Administrative Procedure Act. Interpretative rules do not require notice and comment procedures. The rules are not strictly binding upon the agency and the agency has the discretion to change interpretative rules at any time. When an interpretative rule is challenged, courts usually defer to the agency's expertise in interpreting what the rule means.