Law homework Due 28/11/11 A) The source refers to the literal rule. Describe the literal rule using the source and cases to illustrate your answer (15 Marks) The literal rule is where the courts will give their words a plain, ordinary or literal meaning, even if the result is not very sensible. It involves the judge applying the literal rule even if it results in absurdity. R v Judge of City of London Court (1892) in which Lord Esher said ‘If the words of an Act are clear then you must follow them even though they lead to a manifest absurdity’. The literal rule exactly follows the law that Parliament has made and makes the law certain. It also means that unelected judges do no make law. However the literal rule assumes that …show more content…
There are many cases that use the mischief rule such as: Royal college of Nursing V DHSS (1981) which when using the Mischief Rule, SC decided by majority that it was lawful. However, 2 of the 5 judges dissented, arguing that the Literal Rule should have been used. They said majority of judges were not interpreting the Act but ‘re-drafting it with a vengeance’. It illustrates the potential for the Mischief Rule to re-write the law. Smith V Hughes (1960) Using the Mischief Rule and looking at the intention of the Act, court decided women were guilty. The women were in fact soliciting - it didn’t matter whether they were ‘soliciting in the street’, or while ‘standing in the doorway or on a balcony or at a window’. (Lord Parker). Corkery V Carpenter (1951) Although he wasn’t in charge of a ‘carriage’, Mischief Rule was used & D was guilty. Eastbourne Borough Council V Stirling (2000) Although he was on private land, Mischief Rule meant word ‘street’ was interpreted to include the forecourt, since customers could come from the street. I) Discuss the Advantages and disadvantages of the mischief rule.(15 marks) The mischief rule is used to look at what the act intended to achieve. Like any other rule there are many advantages and disadvantages to their use. The advantages include: It promotes the purpose of the law. This means that when the mischief rule is used it helps to show other people why the
Judicial precedent as a whole is the way in which English law provides and maintains consistency and predictability. This assumption of consistency and predictability through judicial precedent allows the law to exude a sense of certainty, fairness and by extension some amount of flexibility; but the question is, how can something which is consistent and predictable to such a degree that it is considered certain exhibit flexibility? After all one would think that in order to be consistent and predictable there must be rigidity involved.
The court observed that the ‘legal meaning’, i.e. meaning the legislature is taken to have intended, may not correspond to the literal or grammatical meaning. As four justices put
It would be impractical for judges to not make law in some situations as both parties in the case would not want the judge to refuse to deal with the case and they would want the matter decided. ‘Judicial decisions are important as a source of law on matters where the government is
(1) Riggs v. Palmer 115 NY 506, Court of Appeals of New York (1889). Link in Course Readings and Available online: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/archives/riggs_palmer.htm
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
judges simply apply the law of the land to the issue at hand. They are bound by the
1. When interpreting legislation, the Courts use several approaches to aid their interpretation. Describe how the literal, golden and mischief rules of interpretation operate.
All three of these cases, if mechanical jurisprudence were to have been applied, would have been dealt with in the same way. This presence of ‘open texture’ makes it difficult to believe that the judiciary applies its trade in systematic and a mechanistic way, when the law is so general and vague. Open texture and our relative indeterminacy of aim when legislating leaves room for judicial discretion and breadth in the law.
This essay will examine the doctrine of Judicial precedent that helps form the English Legal System. It will illustrate various views that have been raised by Judges and relating cases to the use of ‘Stare decisis’ when creating precedents. In addition it will discuss how the developments in the powers of the courts now also allow them to depart from these precedents to an extent.
The impact of Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1989] EWCA Civ 5 on the doctrine of consideration.
The legal-formalist belief in the capacity of legal rules to determine the outcomes to legal disputes without having recourse to the judge’s political beliefs or sense of fairness has been severely criticised by, amongst others, legal realists and critical legal studies scholars. This assignment will firstly address what legal formalism entails, following which the criticisms of legal formalism will be discussed and lastly whether legal formalism can impede the transformative ideas of the Constitution. All of the above will be analysed to determine the role of legal formalism today.
Rule of Law definition from Oxford dictionary- The supremacy of Law is a feature attributed to the UK constitution by Professor Dicey (Law of Constitution, 1885).
Precision, as the principles of law are set out in actual cases the law becomes very precise. -
The most influential definition of the rule of law is that of the A.V. Dicey. In his work he defines the rule of law to be composed of three central elements. The first element states that “no man is punishable or can be made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts”. This element is designed to deny to governments any rights to make secret or arbitrary laws, or retrospective penal laws, and to limit the discretionary powers of government” . In order to comply with the requirement, it is stated that the rule must be open, clear, accessible and certain. This is supported by Lord Bingham as he argued that the law must be accessible, clear and predictable as wide discretionary powers would lead to arbitrariness which is against the rule of law. This principle is further illustrated by
The English Legal System has several sources of legislation, including the precedent cases, which form