Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The plain meaning rule, also known as the literal rule, is one of three rules of statutory construction traditionally applied by English courts. [1] The other two are the "mischief rule" and the "golden rule". The plain meaning rule dictates that statutes are to be interpreted using the ordinary meaning of the language of the statute.
The literal meaning rule – that if "Parliament's meaning is clear, that meaning is binding no matter how absurd the result may seem" [55] – has a tension with the "golden rule", permitting courts to avoid absurd results in cases of ambiguity.
The mischief rule [1] is one of three rules of statutory interpretation traditionally applied by English courts, [2] the other two being the "plain meaning rule" (also known as the "literal rule") and the "golden rule". It is used to determine the exact scope of the "mischief" that the statute in question has set out to remedy, and to guide the ...
Purposive interpretation is a derivation of mischief rule set in Heydon's Case, [5] and intended to replace the mischief rule, the plain meaning rule and the golden rule. [6] Purposive interpretation is used when the courts use extraneous materials from the pre-enactment phase of legislation, including early drafts, hansards , committee reports ...
The golden rule in English law is one of the rules of statutory construction traditionally applied by the English courts. The rule can be used to avoid the consequences of a literal interpretation of the wording of a statute when such an interpretation would lead to a manifest absurdity or to a result that is contrary to principles of public policy.
This approach marks a break with previous a more rigid modes of interpretation before the 1970s, where courts paid closer attention to the formal expression of the parties' intentions and took more of a literal view of what they had said. The process of interpretation was often skewed by courts who tried to construe contracts in a way that was ...
Textualism is a formalist theory in which the interpretation of the law is based exclusively on the ordinary meaning of the legal text, where no consideration is given to non-textual sources, such as intention of the law when passed, the problem it was intended to remedy, or significant questions regarding the justice or rectitude of the law.
Heydon's Case (1584) 76 ER 637 is considered a landmark case: it was the first case to use what would come to be called the mischief rule of statutory interpretation.The mischief rule is more flexible than the golden or literal rule, in that the mischief rule requires judges to look over four tasks to ensure that gaps within the law are covered.