|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
When it is not clear whether an act falls within what is prohibited
by a particular piece of legislation, the judges can apply
the mischief rule. This means that the courts can take into
account the reasons why the legislation was passed; what ‘mischief’
the legislation was designed to cure, and whether the act
in question fell within the ‘mischief’. For example,
the Street Offences Act 1959 made it an offence for a prostitute
to solicit men ‘in a street or public place’.
In Smith v. Hughes the question was whether a woman who had
tapped on a balcony and hissed at men passing by was guilty
of an offence under the Act. Parker, L.C.J., found her guilty:
‘I approach the matter by considering what is the mischief
aimed at by this Act. Everybody (sic) knows that this was
an Act intended to clean up the streets, to enable people
to walk along the streets without being molested or solicited
by common prostitutes. Viewed in that way, it can matter little
whether the prostitute is soliciting while in the street or
standing in a doorway or on a balcony’.
In the case mentioned, it was comparatively easy to apply
the mischief rule as the circumstances which caused the passing
of the Act were well known. The rule does, however, have limitations
as it is by no means always easy to discover the ‘mischief’
at which particular Act was aimed.
The rules of interpretation discussed above do not apply to
the interpretation of EEC legislation. The European Communities
Act 1972 provides that questions of interpretation of EEC
law must be decided in accordance with the principles laid
down by any relevant decision of the European Court. Therefore,
although EEC legislation has the force of law in England and
thus becomes part of English law, the courts cannot interpret
it by the methods which they apply to the main body of English
law.
In interpreting statutes, the courts make certain presumptions:
(a) that the statute is not intended to have retrospective
effect;
(b) that it applies only to the United Kingdom;
(c) that it is not intended to interfere with existing vested
rights;
(d) that the property of any person will not be confiscated
without compensation;
(e) that there is no intention to interfere with existing
contractual rights;
(f) that there is no intention to interfere with personal
liberty;
(g) that any person to whom judicial or quasi-judicial power
is given will exercise such power in accordance with the rules
of natural justice;
(h) that the statute is not intended to derogate from the
requirements of international law.
Any of these presumptions may be overruled by the precise
words of the statute.
Private Acts (but not public Acts) always have a preamble
which sets out the objects of the legislation. Preambles can
on occasion be of considerable assistance to the courts in
interpreting the Acts.
See also:
Interpretation
of the Law: 'Golden Rule'
Interpretation
of the Law: 'Literal Rule'
Statutory
Interpretation
Terminology:
Civil and Magistrates Courts
Terminology:
County Court
|
|
Solicitors Barristers and Lawyers
index for England Scotland and Wales.
Accident Claims specialist directory for the whole of the
United Kingdom.
|
|
SOLICITORS
ENGLAND & WALES
INDEX
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
An A-Z of solicitors based in England and Wales, dealing with
all matters of law
SOLICITORS SCOTLAND
An A-Z of solicitors based in Scotland, dealing with all matters
of law
INDEX
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
ACCIDENT
AND PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS ONLINE DIRECTORY
INDEX
A
B-C
D-G
H-M
N-R
S-W
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
the Legal Directory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
