Learning Outcomes
After studying this article, you will be able to explain the main rules of statutory interpretation used by courts in England and Wales, including the literal, golden, mischief, and purposive approaches. You will understand when and why each rule is applied, be able to identify key terms and case examples, and apply these principles to SQE1-style questions and scenarios.
SQE1 Syllabus
For SQE1, you are required to understand how statutes are interpreted by the courts and the main rules of statutory interpretation. In your revision, focus on:
- the literal rule, golden rule, mischief rule, and purposive approach to statutory interpretation
- the rationale for each rule and when it is used
- the significance of key case examples for each rule
- how to apply these rules to exam scenarios and identify which rule is being used
Test Your Knowledge
Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.
- Which rule of statutory interpretation do courts usually apply first?
- What is the main difference between the literal rule and the golden rule?
- In which case did the court apply the mischief rule to interpret the meaning of "street or public place"?
- When is the purposive approach most likely to be used by the courts?
Introduction
Statutory interpretation is the process by which courts determine the meaning of legislation. Because statutes may contain ambiguous, broad, or unclear wording, judges use established rules to interpret and apply the law as Parliament intended. The four main rules of statutory interpretation are the literal rule, golden rule, mischief rule, and purposive approach. Understanding these rules is essential for SQE1, as questions often test your ability to identify and apply them in practice.
The Literal Rule
The literal rule requires judges to give words in a statute their ordinary, natural meaning, even if the result is unexpected or harsh. Courts do not look beyond the plain wording of the statute.
Key Term: literal rule The literal rule is a rule of statutory interpretation requiring courts to apply the ordinary meaning of statutory words, regardless of the outcome.
Worked Example 1.1
A statute makes it an offence to "impersonate any person entitled to vote." The defendant impersonates a deceased person at an election. Is the defendant guilty under the literal rule?
Answer: No. Applying the literal rule, a deceased person is not "entitled to vote," so the defendant is not guilty, even though this result may seem odd.
The Golden Rule
The golden rule allows courts to depart from the literal meaning of words if applying the literal rule would produce an absurd or repugnant result. The golden rule is used only when the literal interpretation would make the law unworkable or clearly contrary to Parliament's intention.
Key Term: golden rule The golden rule is a rule of statutory interpretation allowing courts to modify the literal meaning to avoid absurd or unacceptable outcomes.
Worked Example 1.2
A statute states that a person who "kills their parent without a will" inherits their parent's estate. The defendant murders their mother, who died intestate. Should the court allow the defendant to inherit?
Answer: No. The court would use the golden rule to prevent a murderer from benefiting from their crime, avoiding a repugnant outcome.
The Mischief Rule
The mischief rule directs courts to consider the "mischief" or problem the statute was intended to remedy. Judges look at the law before the statute, the defect it aimed to cure, and interpret the statute to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.
Key Term: mischief rule The mischief rule is a rule of statutory interpretation allowing courts to interpret statutes in light of the problem or "mischief" Parliament intended to address.
Worked Example 1.3
A statute prohibits soliciting in a "street or public place." Defendants solicit from windows above the street. Does the statute apply?
Answer: Yes. Applying the mischief rule, the court would interpret the statute to cover soliciting directed at people in the street, regardless of the solicitor's location, to address the mischief Parliament intended to prevent.
The Purposive Approach
The purposive approach is broader than the mischief rule. Courts seek to determine and give effect to the general purpose or aim of the legislation, sometimes considering external materials such as parliamentary debates (Hansard) if the statute is ambiguous.
Key Term: purposive approach The purposive approach is a rule of statutory interpretation where courts interpret statutes to achieve Parliament's overall purpose, even if this means departing from the literal meaning.
Worked Example 1.4
A tax statute is ambiguous about how to value a benefit. Parliamentary debates show the intention was to tax only the extra cost to the employer. Can the court use this information?
Answer: Yes. If the statute is ambiguous, the court may use the purposive approach and refer to Hansard to clarify Parliament's intention.
Comparing the Rules
| Rule | Main Focus | When Used | Example Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Literal Rule | Ordinary meaning | First approach | May lead to odd results |
| Golden Rule | Avoid absurdity | If literal rule is absurd/repugnant | Prevents unjust outcomes |
| Mischief Rule | Remedying the mischief | If literal/golden rules unclear | Focuses on statute's purpose |
| Purposive Approach | Achieving overall purpose | Especially for ambiguous statutes or EU law | May use external materials |
Exam Warning
In SQE1, pay close attention to the wording of the question. If the scenario mentions an "absurd" or "repugnant" result, the golden rule is likely being applied. If the focus is on the problem the statute was meant to solve, the mischief rule is being used.
Revision Tip
Practice identifying which rule is being applied in past exam questions. Look for clues in the facts and the reasoning given by the court.
Key Point Checklist
This article has covered the following key knowledge points:
- The four main rules of statutory interpretation are the literal rule, golden rule, mischief rule, and purposive approach.
- The literal rule applies the ordinary meaning of statutory words, even if the result is harsh.
- The golden rule allows courts to avoid absurd or unacceptable outcomes by modifying the literal meaning.
- The mischief rule focuses on the problem the statute was intended to address and interprets the law to suppress that mischief.
- The purposive approach seeks to achieve Parliament's overall purpose, sometimes using external materials if the statute is ambiguous.
- Courts usually start with the literal rule, moving to other rules if the literal meaning is unclear or leads to an absurd result.
- Understanding when and why each rule is applied is essential for SQE1 exam scenarios.
Key Terms and Concepts
- literal rule
- golden rule
- mischief rule
- purposive approach
