Aropa Assignment
Judges and other judicial officers usually find themselves in perplexing situations in the course of the exercise of their judicial duties. The situations may involve the interpretation of various pieces of law to get meaning. By getting the meaning of these statutes, judges and other judicial officers can apply the law to particular situations. Judges use various approaches to statutory interpretation, and these include applying the general rules to statutory interpretation. In the application of the general rules of interpretation, intrinsic and extrinsic aids of statutory interpretation may be used (Bennion and Bennion, 1992). There are three general rules of statutory interpretation, and these include the literal, golden and mischief rules of statutory interpretation.
The Literal Rule
The literal rule dictates that judicial officers should apply the plain meaning of the word to get its true meaning. This is usually the first rule that is used in statutory interpretation. The plain meaning is given to the words in the statute to get their meaning and understanding (Johnstone, 1954). The statute-given meaning is the intrinsic aid to statutory interpretation. In the Cemetery Act 2020, the plain meaning would be applied to the wording of the statute to get the interpretation. The word car would be interpreted plainly as worded in the statute. If the literal rule produces absurdity in meaning, the judicial officers usually turn to the golden rule.
The Golden Rule
The golden rule allows judicial officers to apply the secondary meaning to the wording of the statutes to get the right interpretation. In applying the secondary meaning, judges may use extrinsic aids such as dictionaries, case laws, law commission reports, and textbooks (Johnstone, 1954). Recently, the parliamentary Hansard has been allowed to be used as the extrinsic aid to statutory interpretation; using the golden rule. The Hansard was allowed in the Pepper V Hart case (A-law resources, 2020). In this case, the judicial officers would look at the words of the transport minister when he was introducing the bill to parliament.
The Mischief Rule
The mischief rule of statutory interpretation is used when the use of the golden rule in interpretation leads to ambiguity. The rule directs judicial officers to look at the intention of the parliamentarians when drafting the statute. The intentions of the drafters should lead judicial officers in construing the meaning of any wording in the statute. It this case, judicial officers would examine the mischief behind the passing of the Cemetery Safety Act.
Analysis of the facts and advice
In determining whether Kiri is guilty, mischief rule is the most appropriate rule to apply in interpreting the cemetery safety act. From the words of the transport minister, it is clear that the legislation was aimed at stopping cars that would cause serious accidents and injury to people. The motorized wheelchair caused personal injury to an elderly man, and this is what the legislation was aimed at preventing. Since it is motorized, the wheelchair also produces noise which the legislation purposed to stop. The mischief of legislating the cemetery safety act shows that the legislation was aimed at guarantying safety in the cemetery. From this, it is clear that Kiri would be found guilty of an offence under the cemetery safety act, and it is probable that she would be fined.
Yunong is a medical practitioner; hence using literal rule would mean that her vehicle is an emergency service vehicle that is allowed to be in the cemetery. This means that Yunong would not be guilty of an offence under the Cemetery safety act. The golden rule can be used to interpret the meaning of civil defence, and according to extrinsic aids such as books, the civil defence would include police officers hence Andrew’s police car is an emergency service vehicle that is allowed in the cemetery. This exonerates Andrew and means that he is not guilty of an offence under the Cemetry Safety Act.
References
Bennion, F. A. R., & Bennion, F. A., R. (1992). Statutory interpretation: A code. Butterworths.
E-law resources. (2020). Pepper V Hart. E-lawresources.co.uk. https://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/cases/Pepper-v-Hart.php
Johnstone, Q. (1954). An Evaluation of the Rules of Statutory Interpretation. U. Kan. L. Rev., 3, 1.