Explain What Is Meant by the Term ‘Statutory Interpretation’ and to What Extent Does This Compliment or Undermine the Role of the Parliament?

Only available on StudyMode
  • Topic: Law, Statutory interpretation, Statutory law
  • Pages : 3 (986 words )
  • Download(s) : 166
  • Published : January 3, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
Explain what is meant by the term ‘statutory interpretation’ and to what extent does this compliment or undermine the role of the parliament?

Statutory interpretation refers to a process used by the courts when it looks at a piece of statute to interpret what its definition is. A statute is a bill also known as a law which was passed by the legislature (Parliament) that imposes rules on people. However these ‘statutes’ may be open to interpretation and are occasionally are riddles with ambiguities. So statutory interpretation is the process that focuses on resolving these ambiguities and deciding how a particular bill or law will apply in a particular case. Some statutes have a very clear and straight forward meaning to them and therefor interpreting them incredibly easy, but in many cases there can be ambiguities and vagueness in the wording of the statute that the judges must try and resolve for the sole purpose of stopping and absurdity occurring. Courts can only interpret the law they do not question the origins or the reason. There are numerous rules when it comes to statutory interpretation, the first and most important of these rules is the rule that governs and deals with the statutes plain language, the rule is essentially the statute means what it says, For example if the statute refers to vehicles it would be interpreted as vehicles not planes or submarines. This is known as the Literal rule and it looks at the statute in its natural and ordinary meaning in its context. The advantage and disadvantages to using this rule is that it does encourage precision in drafting laws, well unless the Legislature had any reason to be deliberately careless. it also is meant to bring a certain sense of certainty, however there is no certainty when It comes to something like literalism so can that really be the case?, It is next to useless when a judge is trying to interpret an act where broad terms have deliberately been used however the fact remains that the...
tracking img