What Statutory Interpretation is

Statutory Interpretation

Statutory Interpretation is the interpretation of statutes, and can be manipulated through different readings of a statute (literal, purposive, golden rule), or through intrinsic and extrinsic materials.

Before continuing to read brief descriptions about these rules, it is important to note that these are only rules for the construction of a statute. They are ultimately guides to interpretation, and are thus not binding.

Major Schools of thought:

Originalism

Originalists interpret statutes with the view that the interpretation should be based on a what the original intention of a legislator was. This makes sense as it accords with what the entire purpose of the rule is, and it promotes consistency within the law.However, the question that one must confront is who determines what the original intention of a law is? Does every member of Parliamenet read proposed legislation, and do all those have the same understanding of it? How do you tell if they all had the same ideas?

Dynamism

Dynamists interpret statutes so that statutes can change over time, to reflect the modern needs and practices of society, and permits the evolution of language and understanding. The rational behind this is that it would be unfeasible for law-abiding people to interpret laws based on what a word in a statute meant 40-50 years ago, and thus the law should reflect current usages and interpretation (think gay... at one time it meant happy, then it meant homosexual, and now currently means stupid. Thus if there was a rule that was enacted in 1800 saying 'no gay people...' someone in 1800 would interpret it to mean 'no happy people...', someone in the 1980's would interpret it to mean 'no homosexuals...', and someone today could interpret it to mean 'no stupid people...')

The problem with dynamic thought is that laws themselves are subject to constant change based on current usages of language. Who determines which usage is the one that should be used? This could be problematic if a judge understood a definition to mean one thing, where most people would understand that meaning to be something else. This could be especially important in a technological context, where new laws are trying to address the information age.

Approaches to Statutory Interpretation:

Literal Rule

The literal rule means the interpretation of Acts purely according to their literal meaning.

Mischief Rule

The Mischief Rule is taken from Heydon's case [(1584) 3 Co Rep 7a], where the judge's job is to interpret the statute because of an error in the common law. (There is an assumption that legislators did not like judicial interpretation, thus they corrected judicial interpretation by enacting a rule)

Purposive Rule

The purposive approach is similar to the mischief rule, but emphasising the intention of the legislature instead of the defect in the previous law.

Golden Rule

The Golden rule is commonly cited by Lord Wensleydale in Grey v Pearson (1857) 6 HL Cas 1: "... the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is to be adhered to, unless that would lead to some absurdity ... in which case the ordinary sense of the words may be modified so as to avoid that absurdity and inconsistency but no farther."