Examples Of Vagueness And Ambiguity

According to Brown and Keeley ambiguity refers to the existence of multiple possible meaning for a word or phrase (Browne & Keeley, 2011, p.53). In the memo Ms. Castle mentioned some resources that justified her claim but also left a lot of ambiguity. Ms. Castle relied on the current success

On the one hand it is evident that terms implied at common law can be ‘implied in law’ or ‘implied in fact’. Terms implied as a matter of fact are said to give effect to unexpressed intentions of the

“Others among you, perhaps fewer in number, will say to yourselves: quite so, there is such a thing as Standard English, or purity of speech, or correctness of expression- something worth safeguarding and fostering; but how the devil is one to accomplish that under the prevailing conditions: in a democratic society full of minorities that have their own dialects or linguistic preferences, and in a world in which television, advertising, and other mass media manage daily to corrupt the language

Statutory interpretation is the legal process whereby a judge applies a statute to a case and must give meaning to the words in the statute in order to decide what they mean and how it should be applied to a particular case. When interpreting statutes, the judges’ role is to put into effect the Parliaments wishes. Conflicts may arise when deciding if the intention of Parliament can be found in the words of the statute itself or whether judges should acquire into the purpose of the Act then interpret the words themselves. In order to interpret these

Fall Commentary Assignment-LAWS 1000BProfessor: Stephen Tasson – TA: Noel Gondek Due Date: October 26, 2012

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. once stated, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience” (Holmes). In making this comment, Mr. Holmes an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court believed that logic should not be the only particular way of understanding a system of rules, but by the influence of one’s knowledge and legal skepticism toward the law. Similarly, proponent’s of legal realism, which is a naturalistic approach to law that focuses on predicting what judges actually do in deciding cases felt the same way as Oliver. On the other hand, supporters of formalism insisted that the law and legal reasoning should determine all adjudications based on objective facts, unambiguous rules, and logic.

In my understanding of the cases of US v. Lopez and Gonzales v. Raich, I find that the elasticity of interpretation of laws can greatly change the outcomes of these cases.

The overarching idea embodied in the organic law is its simplicity to be necessarily understood by the common American. However we must understand that in the interpretation of its jargon; the fabled words of the Supreme give the full spectrum as how the legal lexicon is applied; especially in the protection and promulgation of our rights.

Delaney, J. (1987). “Learning legal reasoning: Briefing, analysis and theory”, John Delaney Publications, Retrieved from

BMGT 380 Exam One Statutory Interpretation 1. Plain Meaning Rule: Courts are supposed to apply and interpret statutes (法令) according to their usual or ordinary meanings. 2. Legislative History (when 1 conflicts with 2，consider 2 first): if legislative history suggests a different outcome than plain meaning rule, the court then will mostly likely do what the legislative history suggests.

34 Issue 2, p533; Yale University, School of Law Language: English, Database: Academic

Statutory interpretation is process of interpreting statutes by the judges. The definition of statutes have had very specific words but indeed the judges would still need the statutory interpretation to help them. The reason of this, even how, the words in the statutes are specific but sometimes the words contains ambiguity and vagueness in words. On top of that, each word could give us different meaning. For example, we can find in the Oxford Dictionary where a word would contain at least one meaning. Hence, without the statutory interpretation, a lot of judges would have trouble in deciding their judgments in deciding a case. This essay will analyse the four rules, intrinsic aids and extrinsic aids and presumptions in the interpretation

In July of 2002, when the Rome Statute of the ICC entered into force, it was a major step towards the realization of the old dream of universal and lasting, if not perpetual peace ( Delmas-Marty, 01)1. In fact, ICC represented one of the most significant opportunities the world has had to prevent or drastically reduce the deaths and devastation caused by conflicts (iccnow, 2012) 2. Unfortunately, as Delmas-Marty in ‘Ambiguities and Lacunae’ pointed out, the court is faced with ambiguities that arise in the relationship between its legal and political substructures (Delmas-Marty, 01)1. In essence, the court’s foundation is weakened by policies that are still dominated by a sovereign model, despite operating principally within a universalist

In this essay we will discuss the process of legal research, writing, and analysis. The subject matter will be presented in a clear, concise and objective manner. The textbook that we will be referencing is "Gilbert Law Summaries: Legal Research, Writing, and Analysis" 10th ed, BarBri Group, 2006.

The enactment of both interim and final Constitutions ushered in a new approach to statutory interpretation. In this essay I argue that the statement made by the court in Daniels v Campbell 2003 (9) BCLR 969 ( C ) at 985 is TRUE.