Skip to content

9084 · 1.1.4

Statutory interpretation flashcards

Revision flashcards for Cambridge 9084 Statutory interpretation (syllabus 1.1.4). Flip, recall, then mark a real past-paper question.

  • Card

    Literal rule?

    Words given ordinary meaning — even if harsh result (Whitely v Chappell).

  • Card

    Golden rule?

    Modify literal meaning to avoid absurdity (Re Sigsworth).

  • Card

    Mischief rule (Heydon)?

    What gap did Act intend to fill? Judge suppresses mischief.

  • Card

    Purposive approach?

    Interpret to give effect to Parliament's purpose (Padfield v Minister).

  • Card

    Ejusdem generis?

    General words limited by specific class — 'other animals' after cats, dogs.

  • Card

    Presumption against retrospectivity?

    Statutes not applied to past events unless clear wording.

  • Card

    What are the strict conditions for using Hansard, as established in Pepper v Hart (1993)?

    Hansard may only be consulted as an extrinsic aid if: 1. The words of the Act are ambiguous, obscure, or their literal application would lead to an absurdity; 2. The material relied upon consists of one or more statements by a minister or other promoter of the Bill; and 3. The statements relied upon are clear.

  • Card

    What is the 'wider approach' of the Golden Rule?

    Where the words of a statute have only one clear meaning, but applying that meaning would lead to a repugnant or absurd result that Parliament could not have intended. The court may modify the words to avoid this outcome. It was used in *Re Sigsworth (1935)*.

  • Card

    What are the four points in Heydon's Case (1584) for the Mischief Rule?

    The court must consider: 1. What was the common law before the making of the Act? 2. What was the 'mischief and defect' for which the common law did not provide? 3. What remedy has Parliament resolved and appointed to cure the 'disease' of the commonwealth? 4. The true reason of the remedy.

  • Card

    Define 'intrinsic aids' to interpretation and give two examples.

    Aids to interpretation found within the statute itself, which help to understand the context and meaning of the Act. Examples include the long title, the preamble, headings, schedules, and specific interpretation sections.

  • Card

    What is the effect of Section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 on statutory interpretation?

    Section 3(1) requires that 'So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.' This effectively mandates a purposive approach for human rights issues.

  • Card

    Expressio unius est exclusio alterius?

    A rule of language meaning 'the express mention of one thing excludes others'. If a statute lists 'cows, pigs, and sheep', it is presumed not to apply to goats, as they were not expressly mentioned.

  • Card

    Noscitur a sociis?

    A rule of language meaning 'a word is known by the company it keeps'. The meaning of an ambiguous word is derived from the words around it. In a list like 'floors, stairs, passages and gangways', the word 'floors' would be interpreted in the context of things people walk on.

  • Card

    What is the main advantage of the literal rule?

    It respects parliamentary sovereignty by applying the law exactly as Parliament wrote it, providing legal certainty and preventing unelected judges from making law.

  • Card

    What is the main disadvantage of the purposive approach?

    It can lead to judicial law-making, where judges 'rewrite' statutes to fit what they believe Parliament's intention was. This may create uncertainty and undermine the separation of powers.