Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
11 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
The Literal Rule |
- words given their ordinary dictionary meaning. - Whitely v Chappell- man tried to vote under the name of a dead man. It was an offence to impersonate a person entitled to vote. - R v Porter- downloaded child porn but deleted it so was not literally in possession of it. - North Eastern Railways v Berriman- man was oiling tracks and was hit by a train, wasnt being repaired. |
|
|
Pros of Literal Rule |
- Respects parliamentary supremacy- unelected judges should not change law (Fisher v Bell) - Consjstency- people know the sentence and can avoid wasting time in court - Quick decisions (R v Cheeseman) |
|
|
Cons of Literal Rule |
- Absurd results (R v Berriman) (Whitely v Chappell) - Hard to apply words with more than one meaning (R v Allen) - Can lead to escaped convictions (R v Cheeseman) (R v Porter) |
|
|
The Golden Rule |
- Modification of the literal rule |
|
|
Narrow application of golden rule |
- If a word has 2 meanings the judge picks one to avoid an absurd result. (R V Allen)- legally married |
|
|
Wider application of golden rule |
- if the word has one meaning which would lead ro an absurd resylt a different meaning is used. (Adler v George) - vicinity |
|
|
Pros of golden rule |
- Make sensible decisions (R v Allen) (Adler v George) - Prevents parliament from passing amended laws so saves time - Respects authority as change is limited |
|
|
Cons of golden rule |
- Limited change - Couldnt be used in Berriman because the result was not absurd - Unpredicatable and lacks guidelines - Undemocraric as judges change the wording of statutes |
|
|
Mischief rule |
Rules laid down in Heydons Case: 1) what was common law when passed 2) What mischief was it designed to remedy 3) What was the remedy 4) reason for remedy Used in Smith v Huges (soliciting) and Royal college of nursing v DHSS( aborrtion act 1967) |
|
|
Pros of mischief rule |
- give effect to parliaments wishes (smith v hughes) - common sense - fill gaps - consider change in social and technological (RCN v DHSS) |
|
|
Cons of mischief rule |
- difficult to find intentions (Pepper v Hart) - undemocratic as unelected judges have too much power - uncertain of result if meaning of statute is changed |
