Statutory and Judicial Interpretation
Question: Discuss the Jurisprudence on statutory and judicial interpretation.
Statutory and Judicial Interpretation refers to the various
modes that courts, judges, and lawyers use to interpret and apply legislation.
Judicial Interpretation is applied in situations where the wording of the statute is not clear, ambiguous, or confusing; this may happen because;
- Draftsmen may have used ambiguous words.
- Where words used in the statute have broad meanings i.e. the word has various possible meanings
- Draftsmen may have used words whose meaning is implied hence requiring judicial and statutory interpretation.
- New society developments require applying the statute to the current developments.
The common law developed majorly three rules to be followed by courts in Judicial and Statutory interpretation.
The following are the rules of Judicial and Statutory interpretation.
- Literal Rule
- Golden Rule
- Mischief Rule and
- The Purposive approach
THE LITERAL RULE.
The literal rule of statutory and judicial interpretation
considers the plain or ordinary meaning of words as stated in the statutes.
Under the Literal rule of statutory interpretation, the courts are not ready to give any further
or extra meaning to the words except as stated in the statute.
In Whitely VChappel (1868),
The statute made it an offense to “impersonate a person entitled to vote” The accused pretended to be
another person who was on the list of voters but deceased and engaged in
voting.
Court applied the literal rule and applied the plain meaning
of words being that the deceased was not considered a person who was
entitled to vote and hence the accused was acquitted.
In some situations applying the literal brings about
absurdity as illustrated in the case of Whiteley
V Chappell. Where the literal rule leads to an absurdity, the Golden rule of statutory interpretation is resorted to by the courts.
THE GOLDEN RULE
The Golden Rule is applied in instances where applying
the literal rule, leads to absurdity. Hence courts resort to the Golden rule.
The Golden rule aims to prevent repugnance of the law and
deliver a fair and just judgment.
In the case of Re Sigsworth(1935),
A son killed his mother. She had not made a will and died
intestate. The law at the time made it possible for the son to take the inheritance
of the mother’s property.
Court applied the Golden rule and the son was to receive
nothing of the inheritance.
The court avoided the use of the literal rule since it was
going to produce an unfair absurd judgment
The Golden Rule is divided into two:
·
The
narrow application.
The narrow application is used in situations where the interpretation of the words of the statute gives more than one literal meaning. Courts
in this instance then consider the meaning one that is less absurd.
It was illustrated In the case of R V Allen (1872),
The statute made it an offense for one to marry while the
previous marriage was still in place. By considering the literal meaning of the
statute, would have led to absurdity.
The court applied a Narrow approach and considered
marriage to mean going through any marriage ceremony.
·
The wide
application
The wide application is used in instances where a single literal meaning exists to words of the statute and applying it leads to repugnancy or absurdity.
This allows the judges' discretionary powers to apply a more convenient ruling by applying the wide approach.
It was illustrated in the case of Pattridge V Crittenden [1968]
The defendant was convicted of selling birds that were
prohibited by the Protection of Birds
Act 1954 after an advertisement
he made in newspapers.
The court applied the Golden rule of statutory interpretation and considered the
advertisement by the defendant to be an invitation to treat and not an offer to
sell.
THE MISCHIEF RULE
Under the Mischief rule, in finding the statutory
interpretation, courts consider the Mischief that the legislature intended to curb
while they drafted the Act in question.
The mischief rule is applied in specific instances when
dealing with statutes that were created to handle certain mischief in
Question.
In the case of Corkery V Carpenter (1951),
The accused was charged with being drunk while in charge of
a carriage as per the Licensing Act 1872.
The Licensing Act did not make any reference as to bicycles.
Court applied the Mischief rule and considered the mischief
that Parliament wanted to curb which is using any format of transport while
intoxicated and the accused was convicted.
Also Read: Ignorance of the Law and Mistake of Facts
THE PURPOSIVE APPROACH
The purposive approach intends to carry out the intention of
Parliament. Judges consider what the motive of Parliament was while passing the
statute during statutory interpretation.
Materials such as Hansards, and parliamentary debate minutes
in statutory interpretation.
In Pepper V Hart
[1992]
Reference to a statement made in the Hansard was considered
valid and used to construe the real meaning of the Act during the case.
AIDS TO STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
Besides the rules of statutory interpretation discussed above, Judges also employ other aids that help to interpret statutes classified as follows;
- Internal aids.
- External Aids.
INTERNAL AIDS
These are aids to statutory interpretation that are found within the Statute itself.
Such as Long titles, preambles, Punctuations, and Short
titles. These can be employed by judges to find meaning to the statutes in
contrast with the rules of statutory interpretation.
·
Long
titles
In Black ClawsonCase [1975] it was held that Long titles should be considered valid
aids in interpreting statutes.
·
Punctuations
In R V Schildkamp,
punctuations were recognized as valid aids in situations where ambiguity
arose.
EXTERNAL AIDS
These are aids to statutory interpretation that are not
found within the statute itself. They are external.
· Legal Dictionaries
These documents contain meanings of Legal Terms. For
example the Black’s Law Dictionary.
In Eddie
Kwizera V Attorney General, Justice Lillian Tibatemwa cited The Duhaime’s Legal dictionary for the
meaning of certain words.
· Publications from Eminent Authors.
In the case of Katabaaziv Uganda Christian University (UCU), the author Moses Ssekaana, Public Law
in East Africa was cited.
·
Presumptions
Presumptions are statements of a fact that take the place of law if not rebutted.
For example, the Presumption of
innocence is enshrined under Article 28(3)
(a) of the Ugandan constitution 1995
(as amended).
In addition, Courts apply
statutory interpretation with the help of other aids of statutory
interpretation. These include Intrinsic and Extrinsic aids/Textual and Non-Textual
aids.
All of these are meant to help courts,
judges, and lawyers to interpret statutes and find the true meaning of the law.
The rules are not fixed
constraints and Judges are free to apply the rules they deem fit.