This chapter explains the significance of statutory interpretation and how problems of interpretation arise. The chapter considers in detail the courts’ approach to interpretation, and traditional rules such as the literal rule, the golden rule, and the mischief rule are all analysed with examples from the case law. In modern times the courts employ a more purposive approach to interpretation, and there is coverage of how this approach works in practice. In particular, the chapter outlines a range of intrinsic and extrinsic aids to interpretation that the courts can rely on in interpreting an Act of Parliament. Among others, these aids include the long title, cross-headings, marginal or side notes, dictionaries, pre-parliamentary materials, statutes on the same subject matter, and, most notably, Hansard. The chapter concludes with an overview of the rules of language, namely ejusdem generis, noscitur a sociis, and expressio unius est exclusio alterius.
12
Chapter
This chapter discusses how to use legislation. It first looks at the ‘anatomy’ of an Act of Parliament and describes each of its composite parts. It then considers the various means by which the courts can interpret the wording of statutory provisions, including a discussion of the impact of the European Communities Act 1972 and the Human Rights Act 1998.
Chapter
This chapter explains the significance of statutory interpretation and how problems of interpretation arise. The chapter considers in detail the courts’ approach to interpretation, and traditional rules such as the literal rule, the golden rule, and the mischief rule are all analysed with examples from the case law. In modern times the courts employ a more purposive approach to interpretation, and there is coverage of how this approach works in practice. In particular, the chapter outlines a range of intrinsic and extrinsic aids to interpretation that the courts can rely on in interpreting an Act of Parliament. Among others, these aids include the long title, cross-headings, marginal or side notes, dictionaries, pre-parliamentary materials, statutes on the same subject matter, and, most notably, Hansard. The chapter concludes with an overview of the rules of language, namely ejusdem generis, noscitur a sociis, and expressio unius est exclusio alterius.
Book
James Holland and Julian Webb
Learning Legal Rules brings together the theory, structure, and practice of legal reasoning in order to help the reader to develop both their knowledge and reasoning skills. It provides techniques of legal research, analysis, and argument, and explains the operation of precedent as well as effective statutory interpretation. When studying law, it is easy to become focused on the substantive aspects of the subject—the concepts, rules, and principles that go to make up contract, tort, crime, etc. In order to study and practise law effectively, it is essential not only to understand what the legal rules are, but also why they are as they are, and what consequences they might have. This requires that you develop the abilities that are the core focus of this book: to find and make sense of the primary and secondary sources of law; to interpret and apply authorities; to construct arguments both about the facts of a case, and as to how and why a particular authority should or should not be applied in a given situation, and to write clearly, and in an appropriate legal style, making reference to authority as necessary, in the proper academic form.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench. This case concerned the legality of a warrant issued by one of the King’s Secretaries of State, the Earl of Halifax, which purported to authorize four of the King’s messengers to search for and take Entick’s papers and property. The case is a seminal judgment on the rule of law, the powers of government, and the nature of the legal system. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147, House of Lords. This case note deals with how the House of Lords interpreted an ouster clause, a statutory provision which seeks to prevent judicial supervision of decisions made by subordinate decision-making bodies, and considers the wider constitutional implications of the courts’ approach to ouster clauses. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary for the Home Department, ex parte Pierson [1998] AC 539, House of Lords. This case explored whether a decision-maker acting in a quasi-judicial capacity was bound by the same decision-making standards as the courts including, for example, whether retrospective decision-making was permitted. As well as these rule of law considerations, it also raises questions as regards the division or separation of functions within the constitution. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 513, House of Lords. In this case, the House of Lords considered whether the Secretary of State could use the prerogative power to set up an alternative compensation scheme to that laid down in statute. It raises questions as regards the limits of the prerogative power, and the separation of powers in the United Kingdom’s constitution. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Evans and another) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21, Supreme Court. This case concerns whether Parliament can have intended for a statutory provision to allow a member of the executive to overturn the decision of a court without good, clearly articulated reasons (Lord Mance), or contrary to constitutional principle (Lord Neuberger). The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.
Book
James Holland and Julian Webb
Learning Legal Rules brings together the theory, structure, and practice of legal reasoning in order to help the reader to develop both their knowledge and reasoning skills. It provides techniques of legal research, analysis, and argument, and explains the operation of precedent as well as effective statutory interpretation. When studying law, it is easy to become focused on the substantive aspects of the subject—the concepts, rules, and principles that go to make up contract, tort, crime, etc. In order to study and practise law effectively, it is essential not only to understand what the legal rules are, but also why they are as they are, and what consequences they might have. This requires that you develop the abilities that are the core focus of this book: to find and make sense of the primary and secondary sources of law; to interpret and apply authorities; to construct arguments both about the facts of a case, and as to how and why a particular authority should or should not be applied in a given situation, and to write clearly, and in an appropriate legal style, making reference to authority as necessary, in the proper academic form.
Chapter
This chapter discusses the corroboration rule and the practice of suspect witness warnings. It covers the meaning and function of corroboration; the fact that there is no general requirement for corroboration at common law and that a conviction or judgment may be based on the evidence of a single witness; where corroboration is required as a matter of law; the abolition of the rule of practice requiring the judge to direct the jury to exercise caution before convicting in the absence of corroboration; the development of suspect witness warnings; cases in which a suspect witness warning is required; and suspect witness warnings and confirming evidence.
Chapter
Jack Beatson, Andrew Burrows, and John Cartwright
This chapter discusses the common law and statutory rules governing exemption clauses, and the control of unfair terms. Written contracts frequently contain clauses excluding or limiting liability. This is particularly so in the case of ‘standard form’ documents drawn up by one of the parties or a trade association to which one of the parties belong. At common law there are special rules on the incorporation of exemption clauses, special rules of construction applicable to them, and a few miscellaneous other common law rules designed to control them. The chapter first considers those common law rules before going on to the legislative control of exemption clauses and unfair terms. The focus of the discussion of statutory control is the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 for non-consumer contracts, and the Consumer Rights Act 2015 for consumer contracts.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench. This case concerned the legality of a warrant issued by one of the King’s Secretaries of State, the Earl of Halifax, which purported to authorize four of the King’s messengers to search for and take Entick’s papers and property. The case is a seminal judgment on the rule of law, the powers of government, and the nature of the legal system. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147, House of Lords. This case note deals with how the House of Lords interpreted an ouster clause, a statutory provision which seeks to prevent judicial supervision of decisions made by subordinate decision-making bodies, and considers the wider constitutional implications of the courts’ approach to ouster clauses. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary for the Home Department, ex parte Pierson [1998] AC 539, House of Lords. This case explored whether a decision-maker acting in a quasi-judicial capacity was bound by the same decision-making standards as the courts including, for example, whether retrospective decision-making was permitted. As well as these rule of law considerations, it also raises questions as regards the division or separation of functions within the constitution. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 513, House of Lords. In this case, the House of Lords considered whether the Secretary of State could use the prerogative power to set up an alternative compensation scheme to that laid down in statute. It raises questions as regards the limits of the prerogative power, and the separation of powers in the United Kingdom’s constitution. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Evans and another) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21, Supreme Court. This case concerns whether Parliament can have intended for a statutory provision to allow a member of the executive to overturn the decision of a court without good, clearly articulated reasons (Lord Mance), or contrary to constitutional principle (Lord Neuberger). The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 ER 807, King’s Bench. This case concerned the legality of a warrant issued by one of the King’s Secretaries of State, the Earl of Halifax, which purported to authorize four of the King’s messengers to search for and take Entick’s papers and property. The case is a seminal judgment on the rule of law, the powers of government, and the nature of the legal system. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary for the Home Department, ex parte Pierson [1998] AC 539, House of Lords. This case explored whether a decision-maker acting in a quasi-judicial capacity was bound by the same decision-making standards as the courts including, for example, whether retrospective decision-making was permitted. As well as these rule of law considerations, it also raises questions as regards the division or separation of functions within the constitution. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 AC 513, House of Lords. In this case, the House of Lords considered whether the Secretary of State could use the prerogative power to set up an alternative compensation scheme to that laid down in statute. It raises questions as regards the limits of the prerogative power, and the separation of powers in the United Kingdom’s constitution. The document also includes supporting commentary and questions from author Thomas Webb.
12
