Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
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.
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 ...
Denning LJ held that the Act should be interpreted according to the mischief that Parliament was attempting to remedy, with consideration of the social conditions that prevailed at the time. [ 1 ] The question for decision in this case is whether we are at liberty to extend the ordinary meaning of "burden" so as to include a contingent burden ...
Interpretation of a particular statute depends upon the degree of creativity applied by the judges or the court in the reading of it, employed to achieve some stated end. It is often mentioned that common law statutes can be interpreted by using the Golden Rule, the Mischief Rule or the Literal Rule.
Heydon's Case 76 ER 637 (1584) (Exchequer of Pleas): The first case to use what would come to be called the mischief rule for statutory interpretation. Darcy v Allein [1603] 77 Eng. Rep. 1260 (King's Bench): (most widely known as The Case of Monopolies): establishing that it was improper for any individual to be allowed to have a monopoly over ...
America was opened after the feudal mischief was spent. We began well. No inquisitions, here, no kings, no nobles… Ralph Waldo Emerson Dear Chris: Iam writing because we have an emergency. Here are U.S. news headlines from a two-week period in the late summer of 2006: July 22: “CIA WORKER SAYS MESSAGE ON TORTURE GOT HER FIRED.”
Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart [1992] UKHL 3, is a landmark decision of the House of Lords on the use of legislative history in statutory interpretation.The court established the principle that when primary legislation is ambiguous then, in certain circumstances, the court may refer to statements made in the House of Commons or House of Lords in an attempt to interpret the meaning of the ...