In law there are three different rules which have been set to interpret all rulings with, these are the literal rule, the golden rule and the mischief rule. The main rule is the literal rule

Authors Avatar

Timed essay  Nathalie Hartland

In law there are three different rules which have been set to interpret all rulings with, these are the literal rule, the golden rule and the mischief rule.  The main rule is the literal rule.  This follows the law to the word doing exactly what the law says it to.  An advantage of the literal rule is that it respects parliamentary sovereignty.  A big disadvantage though is that by sticking to the original meaning this can sometimes lead to absurdities and unjust solutions for example Whitley v Chapell (1868).  The law says that when a person is voting that they are not allowed to impersonate ‘any person entitled to vote’.  By imitating a dead person and using the literal rule he was able to get away with it as he was not technically breaking the law as a dead person is not entitled to vote.

Join now!

The next rule is the golden rule.  This is very similar to the literal rule, the spotlight is still the wording of the law but the actual meaning of a word can be modified to stop absurd outcomes.  An example of this is shown in the case Adler v George.  The defendant was charged with obstructing a member of the armed forces ‘in the vicinity of any prohibited place’.  He argued that ‘in the vicinity’ actually meant near to and because he was actually at the scene of the crime that he could not be charged.  But the court applied ...

This is a preview of the whole essay