Statutory Interpretation

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

1. When interpreting legislation, the Courts use several approaches to aid their interpretation. Describe how the literal, golden and mischief rules of interpretation operate.

Why is it necessary to consider other sources of legal interpretation in addition to the applicable statutory language?

Based on information currently available, the EPA believes the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2) meets the NCP threshold criteria and provides the best balance of tradeoffs among the other alternatives with respect to the balancing and modifying criteria. EPA expects the Preferred Alternative to satisfy the following statutory requirements of CERCLA §121 (b): (1) be protective of human health and the environment; (2) comply with ARARs; (3) be cost-effective; and (4) utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent practicable. Though Alternative 2 does not meet the statutory preference for treatment, this Proposed Plan explains why that preference

Driedger's approach stresses that the language of a statute can be insufficient to “determine the full intent of the legislature,” and so in these cases use of external sources may be necessary

Interpretive regulations are rules issued by an agency to help clarify existing regulations and laws. Interpretive regulations do not create a new law or change a regulation it just help understand the point of that statute better. They exist to help clarify or explain a statute or regulation. Interpretive rules are simply a way of how agency understands the statute and their duties. Interpretive law cannot be used in a legal procedure its only there to remind agencies of their

‘The natural and reasonable desire that statutes should be easily understood is doomed to disappointment. Thwarted, it shifts to an equally natural and reasonable desire for efficient tools of interpretation. If statutes must be obscure, let us at least have simple devices to elucidate them. A golden rule would be best, to unlock all mysteries. Alas there is no golden rule. Nor is there a mischief rule, or a literal rule, or any other cure-all rule of thumb. Instead there are a thousand and one interpretative criteria. Fortunately, not all of these present themselves in any one case; but those that do yield factors that the interpreter must figuratively weigh and balance.’ – Lord Bingham

The courts, too, will be called upon to specify legislative details, meaning, and reach of legislation. Many scholars in the legal realism camp

The Judicature, is authorised to interpret the law, therefore it contributed indirectly to the ultimate decision in the case by using the statutory laws and precedent cases such as Hatsatouris v Hatsatouris [2001]

For example, the word ‘inflict’ has been interpreted in numerous ways in various cases over time. In R v Clarence , ’inflict’ requires evidence of an assault or battery; yet R v Wilson claims that ‘direct application of force’ is all that is necessary. R v Martin states that the ‘force was indirectly applied’ but in R v Ireland ‘inflict’ is defined as ‘cause’. The redefining and multiple interpretations make it hard to understand the true definitions and leads to a lack of clear

Statutory interpretation is required where complication and ambiguity arises as to what the section actually provides and to whom is within the provisions. There are numerous occurrences where judges call for statues to be interpreted further in more depth; such as failure of legislation to cover a point, a broad term, drafting

Can a corrective approach to Scrivener’s Error find conceptual room in a formal textualist theory of statutory interpretation?

In the essay, the arrangement of the law and the rationale behind will be focused. Conclusion and limitation of the law are added at the end of this essay.

Translation is not only the process of transferring words from language to another. Translation, with respect to all its fields, is deemed a way of gathering cultures and civilization together. One of the paramount important fields of translation is obviously the legal one as the language of law is regarded the most difficult and the most complex for either translators or draftsmen. Legal translation has many features that distinguish it from any other field. During translating legal documents, translators pay a special attention to those features in order to preserve the meaning of the source text and lead to the same results in well-formed text.

With the increasing number of international bodies, institutions and accords, the need for legal discourse with its molds and fixed-like characteristics grows, especially in drafting international documents. Legal translation is considerably distinct from other fields. Drawing on Harvey, Cao (2007) maintains that legal translators, particularly those engaged in translating international instruments, are required to possess certain prerequisites that enable them to combine the free literary style with the very meticulous approach of technical translation, while putting into consideration the archetypes and limitations imposed over methodologies of translation due to the restricting nature of law. (p. 3) These features, accordingly, have to be met with an appropriate equivalent that preserves the core of law while translating into another language concerning lexical items and complex grammatical structures.