English Legal System & Practice - Essay Example

3) Ordinary words must be construed in their common meaning, and technical terms are to given their technical meaning, unless absurdity would result (golden rule). 4) When an Act has a curing of defect in the law for its purpose, any ambiguity shall be resolved in such a way so as to fulfil that aim (mischief rule). 5) When a list of specific items that belong to the same class is followed by general words, the general words are to be regarded as confined to the other items of the same class (the rule ejusdem generis (“of the same kind”). 6) When a list of specific items is not followed by general words, it is to be regarded as exhaustive (the rule expressio unius est exclusio alterius (“the inclusion of the one is the exclusion of the other”). 7) When a prior Act is found to be “on the like matter”, it can be used as an aid in construing the statute in question (the rule in paru materia, “on the like matter”). 8) When a word or group of words has uncertain meaning, its construction should proceed in the light of its surrounding words (the rule noscitur a sociis (“known by its associates”).

(“Rules and Principles of Statutory Interpretation” 295). In addition to these rules, there exist several general presumptions with regard to interpretation of statutes. The latter are presumed: not to bind the Crown in its decisions; not to operate retrospectively in the sphere of substantive (but not procedural) law; not to infringe upon vested rights; not to interfere with the jurisdiction of the courts; and not to contravene Acts on constitutional rights or norms of international law (“Rules and Principles of Statutory Interpretation” 295).

The aforementioned rules of statutory interpretation may be illustrated by the following examples. In London and North Eastern Railway Co v Berriman (1946) the court decided that the claims of damages by the widow of the railway worker knocked down and killed by a train should not be satisfied as the statute provided that compensation was available to workers killed when engaging in ‘relaying or repairing’ tracks, while the worker in question was involved in doing routine maintenance, which the court deemed not being within the meaning of ‘relaying or repairing’ (Elliott and Quinn 44).

This case may be taken as an example of literal rule in practice. The golden rule was used in interpretation of Section 57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 in R v Allen (1872), when the court ruled that the phrase “whosoever being married shall marry any other person during the life of former husband or wife. shall be guilty of bigamy” led to the absurd conclusions, as it was impossible for a person already married to ‘marry’ anyone else, and the wording was accordingly changed from ‘shall marry’ to ‘shall go through a marriage ceremony’ (Elliott and Quinn 46).

Finally, the case of L’Office Cherifien des Phosphates Unitramp SA v Yamashita-Shinnihon Steamship Co Ltd (The Boucraa) (1994) demonstrated the application of presumption against retrospective effect in court ruling (Elliott and Quinn 50). This and other cases show how the rules of statutory interpretation are applied in the English case law. 2. The System of Judicial Precedent and the Right of House of Lords not to Be Bound by Its Own Past Decisions The modern English case law grew up out of standardisation of various ‘common laws’ of England undertaken by William the Conqueror in the second half of the 11th