The Language and the Approaches Used in Statutory Interpretation - Case Study Example

? Sta y Interpretation Part A Facts of the case Mr. Frank Doyle has filed a case in court claiming his job-seekers allowance. He has two houses across each street. He pays his contributions to job seekers-allowance from his small earnings. After he goes bankrupt, he applies to receive his job seekers stipend. The court denies him the entitlement since it is not clear whether he owns the second house. The commissioner argues that material facts in the case do not hold much. Claimant wants his second house be disregarded when calculating for his capital. Legislative law states that any person having more than 8000 pounds of capital entitled to his name shall not be allowed to claim the allowance. The court argues that the second house must not be disregarded when calculating his capital. Mr. Doyle says that he wants the second house exempted in assets determination. The commissioner refutes this claim. By occasionally using the second house across the street, it does guarantee it as his house. In the real sense he had purchased both the houses. The court is of the opinion that the second house is ‘annex” of the other. The two houses are seen as one house being used to serve different purposes. House A is used as a dining area while house B acts as a bathroom and bedroom. Therefore Mr. Frank should not ask the court to disregard the second house as his part of the capital. After calculations are done, it is found that his capital exceeds the one stipulated by the law. He is denied the allowance in the end. Legal issues in the case The claimant wants his rights to allowance entitlement respected. He legally contributed to the allowance. When he wants to claim the payment, the court has fast thrown away his case. It claims that the case lacks a basis. Legally, the victim feels that the second house that he purchased should be not be used when calculating his assets. For a person to earn the job seekers, his capital should not exceed 8000 pounds. This is a provision in the law. If the second house is used to calculate his capital, then it is not legally right for him to claim the allowances. The court also has a legal right to protect the state against economic criminals like Mr. Doyle. He wants to trick the state into giving him the allowance. This according to court is a violation of the job seekers act. An ownership conflict is being outlined in this case. For any dispute concerning properties, legal actions are the best option. The language and the approaches used in interpretation Contextual approach Lord Ward uses contextual approach. This is using the use of words the way they appear in the statutes but changing their meaning when interpreting. This ensures clarity in judge’s deliverance. The discipline has ambiguities which ought to be avoided. In reading the first paragraph of the statute he states that “under regulation 88 the capital and income partner or polygamous “wife”, which by virtue of section 13 (2) of the Act are assumed as his, are to be aggregated with his”. His wife agrees to be using the house as hers. Therefore, the words are used the way they appear but are applied in the case before the court. Literal meaning method The judge himself explains the meaning of using the words literally. The word dwelling has been used to mean a house. He states that “dwelling has been chosen, not, for, example, dwelling –house nor residential accommodation. To quote the judge “a residence” is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as place of residence; dwelling - place, habitation, house”. He goes further to say “dwelling place is a place of abode whereas dwelling house is a house occupied as a place of residence”. Present is a clear distinction of a dwelling house from the office, a business house or a warehouse. The judge only plays with this word to confuse the proceeding. It sinks in entire people’s minds that the dwelling is rightfully belongs to Mr. Doyle and cannot be excluded in determining his asset. Golden rule: This is a technique of statutory interpretation when the jury uses the old meaning of words. This is the direct the direct quoting of the statute. Some clauses are very explanatory and they need not be interpreted further. This comes out clear when he reads out the regulation 5(5), and I quote, “Where a person is liable to make payments in respect of two (but not more than two) dwellings, he shall be treated as occupying both dwellings as his home only.” He reads out the remaining provisions of this clause. It is evident from this statement that no word has been added or removed. In addition the, judge does not expound on the clause. In any case a statement has been altered in such a way that it includes or excludes some words, the meaning is instantly lost. A new meaning comes up. Mischief ruler The Lord uses the exact concept of the word to fool the court. His learned friends know the exact point he is driving at but the victim never realizes. When the Lord talks of an annexed house, mischief is read in his statement. Logically, it seems to Mr. Doyle that the two houses may have been merged as they are serving two purposes. There is a provision in this context of the statute and the lord interprets it by playing with words. It becomes evident when the case is thrown away in the end. Mischief reads when his majesty uses the term “dwelling –house”. This confuses the victim. The court obviously wants to rule in the direction of the state to protect its economy and prevent the job seeker from getting the allowance. The judgment In giving the judgment, the lord has considered all the facts of the case. According to the law, economic crime is punishable. The judge weighs all the evidences before giving out the judgment. To him, the case lacks credibility. The only punishment the victim gets is having his allowance denied. The commissioner feels that claimant’s representative is right to defend him. He shows a kind heart by considering that the claimant has the right to claim for financial support. The only issue is the ownership of the second house. He says “ this is part of the dwelling of this family. It can be described in simple terms that it is a house that has been split into two.” The commissioner in giving out the ruling refers to Acts and clauses that guide him and the team to decide on the case. Sec.13 (1) of job seekers Act provides: “No person shall be entitled to an income-based Jobseeker’s allowance if his capital, or a prescribed part of it, exceeds the prescribed amount.” However, Section 12 (4) provides that “No person shall be entitled to an income-based jobseeker’s allowance if his capital, or a prescribed part of it, exceeds the prescribed amount.” The judge is therefore very sound in giving out his ruling. He acts within the jurisdiction. There is no enough evidence to substantiate that the second house is not fully used by the claimant. It rightly fully belongs to him though he uses it occasionally. It must be included in the final calculation of his assets. The victim is well represented and the facts that the commissioner is basing his arguments on is well understood to him. In summary, the case has failed twice. He has lost the fast case and also the appeal. It can be concluded that the court acted a bit harsh and strict in dealing with this case. Part B The procedure to be followed The police after identifying that it was Brian who stole the petty tools will collect the evidence to try him in court. This is a petty offence and can be presided over by the lowest in the judiciary. The owner of the garden tools and fountain panel files a case in the local court. Local magistrate may preside over this case. While filing the case, the person gives all the details of Brian. He states the material value of goods stolen by the offender. The court then gives a warrant of arrest to the authority to arrest Brian or if already in custody. It may set the date of mentioning the case. On the date of mentioning, the case is confirmed. The case filed is read to the accused by one of the court clerks. All the details about the case like time, date, things stolen and the owner are mentioned in the court. After this Mr. Brian is given a chance to disagree. If he denies, a date is set to have the case heard, that is, the first hearing. At the first hearing, the case is confirmed again and accused is notified of the crime he is being accused of committing. Accused can deny the allegation for the second time. This puts the court through a hearing process. His rights are read to him before trial begins. Owner of the goods stolen gives his version of the story. If there are witnesses, they give their narration. Brian is a poor man who cannot afford a lawyer. He represents himself. The court , after considering the evidence given and the seriousness of the case, may sentence the accused. For example he can be fined or jailed for a certain term. The fine can exceed the value that he sold the items. Being a poor man and a drunkard, he is unable to pay the fine and fears facing the jail term (Alschuler, 1976 pp. 1069. He plans to appeal the case. He applies for an appeal and states that this time; he wants a jury to preside over the case. The appeal is always allowed and through friends he gets a lawyer to represent him. He argues that the ruling was unfair considering the fact that the evidence was questionable and the fine imposed on him is too much. He has heard of the relationship between the warder and a member of the jury and wants to take advantage of the situation. He confronts the jury and threatens to expose the relationship if he is not helped. Summary of the procedure The crown prosecutor When the case is taken to the court, this is lawyer representing the government to prosecute any criminal case. He actually puts a charge on the case and sees to it that the proceedings commence appropriately. Commencement must be as stipulated by the law. On the other hand he will represent the public. In this case, he represents the public against the criminal offence that Mr. Brian has committed. The public is part of the group that pays the allowances. It will be against the law for the court to assume this as a petty offence and let Mr. Brian free. He makes the preparation for the case mainly through extensive research on the law. This makes him well conversant will the law and all the statutory provisions. Acts of the legislative branch of the government is also important in this case. They are the basis of laws in a country. The judiciary only acts to interpret the law and prosecute. Categorizing the case Offences are not categorized the same. “There exist two types; summary offences and indictictable offences” ((Alschuler, 1976 pp.1069). They are grouped in the level of seriousness. Mild cases are summary in nature while indictable are weighty cases. The prosecutor will determine the type of offence the accused has committed. In this, he will charge Brian with summary offence. The case carries less weight with it. The evidence, exhibits are also gathered by him. The evidence is collected from the police department. The basis of laying the charges is also done by him. He may decide that the charges are based on certain jurisdictions. These jurisdictions can limit the court in a certain case. The facts of the case are determined by the overall prosecutor. His duty his to give the proof that it is the accused who committed the offence. Witness play crucial role in the justice process. They give testimony against the case presented by the Crown. All facts are collected from the witnesses. Therefore the court gives a “subpoena” that allows them to give testimony in the court. It is a court order compelling a person’s appearance in the court to give the needed evidence. They must take an oath that binds them to tell the truth. Oaths go according to the ages of the witnesses. Those below the age of 15 swear that they give a true information if the fully digs into what the case is all about. The court is an umbrella term that covers different courts spread throughout a country. Criminal cases are tried in the provincial courts (Alschuler, 1976 pp. 1069). Mr. Brian will therefore be tried in this court. Serious cases are tried in superior courts; high court and courts of appeal. When appealing, he may go to high court or court of appeal. These courts must refer to the provincial court to get more evidence and some important facts about the case. Defense lawyer He will represent Mr. Brian. Through him, the principle rights of the accused are not violated. The lawyer discloses the contents of the case to him. Things like evidences and exhibits are highlighted for him. Witness statements will give the victim the direction on how to defend himself. These are provided by the defense lawyer. Negotiations can be initiated to withdraw the charges or charges can be lessened. Proof of offence and answering charges The crown prosecutor proves that the accused committed the offence. He does so by presenting all the given against him. The most important part is answering to the charges. Mr. Brian is given time to explain himself. His lawyer can help him respond since he or she understands the law and the constitution. He can deny the charges. The basis on which he or his lawyer bases their argument is important. It can be based on logistics or just simple facts. Mr. Brian for example, can deny the evidence presented in the court. The other defense he can use is the blood sample collected or refutes the claim by insisting that he is not aware of such incidence. He can also question the witnesses thoroughly. Witnesses must be consistent in their testimonies. Any variation in the statement can give him the chance to challenge the case. In appealing the case, the jury can convince his learned friends to review the case. The appeal can be based on the fact that the fine is reduced to amount the accused can afford. On the other hand, the jury can review the basis of conviction. The accused has been linked to several counts of crime. However, this should not render him a prime suspect in every crime done within the locality or county. The court can take time and review everything from the fine to evidence provided. It can also look at the health condition of the convict. An argument can be based on the fact that the authorities brought him into custody without first taking him to hospital. His rights may have been violated. The time crime was committed can be reviewed. Nobody saw him but the local police are fast to conclude that it was he who stole the items. The court can also argue that maybe the accused was not in the right state of mind while doing these things. Alcohol can impair judgment even though this should not guarantee him to continue drinking and act in whatever way he wishes. Brian can use the information to earn himself release from the jail. This is very confidential information. The judiciary is faced with very strict ethics that they must follow. He can therefore find a loophole to pin the judiciary down. In the event they decline to give him favors, he can plan for an exposure. Brian can appeal to the high court. The local courts may not be thorough when ruling on the case. The court can at least look at his plea for having been harassed on the day of arrest. The court can arrange with the state can arrange for a lawyer to represent him in the case. High courts have the best jury who understands and interprets the law and statutes. The court can consider his financial status. He stole items worth 120 dollars and sold them at 40 dollars. He has been unfairly fined after the incident. In the event the household has refused to respond, Brian can go to a civil court. Here, he will seek to claim the amount he is entitled. The household may be refused a court order to appear in the court. Reference Alschuler, A, W, 1976, The Trial Judge's Role in Plea Bargaining, Part I, Columbia Law Review, 76(7), pp.1059-1154. Read More