6391686
Beschreibung
Karteikarten von Alex Nolan, aktualisiert more than 1 year ago
|
Erstellt von Alex Nolan
vor etwa 8 Jahre
|
|
| Frage | Antworten |
| What is statutory interpretation? | Statutory interpretation allows judges to interpret some vague acts. |
| What are the rules of statutory interpretation? | 1. The literal rule 2. The mischief rule 3. The golden rule |
| What is the literal rule? | The literal rule requires the judge to give the word or phrase its natural, ordinary or plain meaning, even if this appears to be contrary to the intentions of the Parliament. |
| What is the golden rule? | If the literal rule has produced an absurd result, which Parliament could not have intended, the judge can substitute a reasonable meaning; or if it produces more than one result the judge should select the less absurd one. |
| What is the mischief rule? | the court looks at the gap in the law which parliament had felt it necessary to fill when passing the act. It then interprets the act to fill that gap and to remedy the mischief Parliament had been aiming to remedy |
| What two cases illustrate the literal rule? | 1. Whiteley V Chappell 2. London & NE. Railway v Berriman |
| What was the Whiteley v Chappell case about? (brief) | The defendant used the vote of a dead man. The offence stated it was illegal 'to impersonate any person entitled to vote'. A dead person does is not entitled to vote therefore the defendant was not guilty. |
| What happened in the London & N.E. Railway v Berriman (1946) | A man was killed whilst oiling the train line, there had been no lookout, which was legally required. The Act stated lookout was needed when relaying or repairing the track the man was oily the track so the accused was not found guilty. |
| what cases illustrate the Mischief rule? | Smith v Hughes Royal College of Nursing v DHSS |
| Explain what were the fact of the Smith v Hughes case? | The defendants were prostitutes who had been charged under The street offence act 1959 which made it an offence to solicit in a public place, The prostitutes were soliciting from private premises in windows or on balconies so could be seen by the public |
| What was the held of the Smith v Hughes case? | The court applied the mischief rule holding that the activities of the defendants were within the mischief the Act was aimed at even though under a literal interpretation they would be in a private place.. |
| What were the facts of the Royal college of nursing v DHSS (1981) | The abortion act 1967 stated that an abortion was only legally performed if carried out by a registered medical practitioner. due to medical advancements the first stage of the process was carried out by nurses under supervision. Royal college of nurses were being sued in an attempt to enforce the wording of the act |
| what was the held of the royal college of nursing v DHSS (1981) | It was legal for nurses to carry out such abortions. The Act was aimed at doing away with back street abortions where no medical care was available. The actions of the nurses were therefore outside the mischief of the Act of 1861 and within the contemplate defence in the 1967 Act. |
Möchten Sie mit GoConqr kostenlos Ihre eigenen Karteikarten erstellen? Mehr erfahren.