Statutory Interpretation Methods
Added on 2020-05-28
6 Pages1301 Words240 Views
|
|
|
Running head: CORE LEGAL SKILLSCore Legal SkillsName of the StudentName of the UniversityAuthor note
1CORE LEGAL SKILLSThe literary method of Statutory InterpretationThe method of interpreting statutes by the judges is known as Statutory interpretation.The description of statutes have been very particular with words but the respected judges willrely and refer to the statutory interpretation for helping them. However, the words mentionedin the statutes are considered vague and contains uncertainty. The words included in thestatute have distinguished meanings. Therefore, vagueness and uncertainty has a negativeoutcome when the judges make the judgments while deciding the case. During the development of the interpretation of any statutes, the judges must abide bythe traditional rules since it acts like their guidance while establishing the meaning of the Actof Parliament. An Interpretation of Statutes includes a few rules that needs to be used whilemaking a decision. The first rule that was started is the literal rule and it is treated to be themost convenient and less problematic method in interpretation. In the literal rule, the judgesare needed to consider what the legislation states instead of the actually meaning. In practicalsense, the judges are suppose to consider the literal meaning that have plain and simplemeaning1. However, the judges cannot alter the meaning of the statute for attaining the viewof the court. The basic and chief merit of the literal rule is that it can be fitted naturally in theconstitutional principle without creating any kind of trouble or issues2. According to theexplanation of Cross, he had determined a limitation of the literal rule. In this limitation, hestated the judge would provide a clear and direct effect that associates with the grammar orthe technical meaning of the terms mentioned. One must also establish the limit and extent ofthe words used with proper and valid reference. However, as per the formula, it can becriticized and stated that the interpretation cannot be interpreted in proper long phrases orsentences rather it should be interpreted in single and isolated terms. Therefore, when these1 MacCormick, D. Neil, and Robert S. Summers.Interpreting statutes: a comparative study. Routledge, 2016.2 Ní Mhuirthile, Tanya, Catherine O'Sullivan, and Liam Thornton. "Fundamentals of the Irish Legal System:Law, Policy & Politics." (2016).
2CORE LEGAL SKILLSisolated or single terms are joined together the entire meaning of the statute will have nosense as because of the relative clear meaning. The literal rule includes a usual and simplemeaning that usually makes a clear difference between the simple and technical wordsinvolved in the statutes along with the discretion in the judges. However, the literal rule wasnot considered a good rule to follow while determining the cases since it produces only onekind of interpretation. Secondly, golden rule can be followed and used if the judges find difficulty andabsurdity while applying the literal rule; he might proceed with the golden rule. The actualuse of the rule states that it associates the judges to find what the judges should search whatthe statute should have stated or mean instead what is already stated3. The golden ruleinvolves two kinds of meanings4. One being the narrow meaning and the other one is wider.The golden rule breaches the separation of power where there is no such clear difference. Incase of absurdity issues, there might be injustice while taking the decisions. Lastly, mischiefrule can be used and implied if neither the literal rule nor the golden rule is applicable. It isconsidered to be the most flexible rule that can resolve the problem of the judges5. Themischief rule can only be used when there is uncertainty in the cases. However, even this rulehas a few demerits as it indirectly makes the judges to have the role to make the law.Therefore, the separation of power can be voided in certain situations. In the concept of statutory interpretation, there are two existing approaches that arepurposive and literal. The aim of both the approaches are that it establishes how the judgescan state and determine the meaning of statute6. The purposive approach is generally used3 Anstis, Siena, and Thomas Touchie. "REVISITING THE ROLE OF PRESUMPTIONS OF LEGISLATIVEINTENT IN STATUTORY INTERPRETATION."Canadian Bar Review95.2 (2017).4 Gluck, Abbe R., and Richard A. Posner. "Statutory Interpretation on the Bench: A Survey of Forty-TwoJudges on the Federal Courts of Appeals." (2018).5 Feldman, David. "Statutory Interpretation and Constitutional Legislation." (2014).6 Brenncke, Martin. "Hybrid Methodology for the EU Principle of Consistent Interpretation."Statute LawReview(2017): hmw048.
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents