STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - HardleyLaw - home法定解释hardleylaw回家.ppt

Topic 4 Statutory interpretation Topic 4 Statutory interpretation ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.’ ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master - that’s all.’ ‘Humpty Dumpty’ in Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass. Write down your understanding of the following words: Ambiguous? What does it mean? Round? What does it mean? Did you know? Of the 500 most-used words in the English language, each has, on average, 23 different meanings The word ‘round’ has 70 different meanings! Introduction to statutory interpretation Many statutes are passed by Parliament each year. The meaning of the law in these statutes should be clear and explicit but this is not always achieved Statutory interpretation concerns the role of judges when trying to apply an Act of Parliament to an actual case. The wording of the Act may seem to be clear when it is drafted and checked by Parliament, but it may become problematic in the future. The rules of interpretation There are two approaches to statutory interpretation: the literal approach and the purposive approach. There are also three main rules of statutory interpretation that judges use to decide a case: the literal rule the golden rule the mischief rule “The courts must uphold the will of Parliament and not try to usurp its powers, but sometimes it necessary to try and understand what the words used by the parliamentary draftsman mean.” TASK: Cheeseman v Director of Public Prosecutions (1990) Question 4???? Was this the correct decision? Why? Reasons? What else could/should the courts have done? Literal Approach versus Purposive Approach The case of Cheeseman illustrates several of the problems of stautory interpretation. It is an example of the courts taking the words literally. However, it can be argued