SU LMS

Week 2 Literal Rule of Interpretation

Literal Rule

The starting point where the courts are interpreting legislation is in the statute natural meaning, the Literal rule. The court considers what the legislation is actually saying rather than considering what it might mean. Therefore the words in the legislation takes their literal meaning which involves the use of plain, ordinary, literal, grammatical meaning. Words in the statute can result in a undesirable outcome.

Disadvantages of the Literal rule

There can be a disagreement as to what amounts to the ordinary or natural meaning. R v Maginnis (1987) AC 303

Creates loopholes in the law.

Fisher v Bell (1961) QB 394

A shopkeeper was prosecuted for offering to sell an offensive weapon in the showcase which is an offence of a Restriction of Offensive Weapon Act 1959. The court held that ‘offer of sale’ must take its ordinary meaning in law therefore does not coincide with an invitation to treat.

Lead to injustice. London and North Eastern Railway v Berriman (1946) AC 278

Creates awkward precedents which require Parliamentary time to correct.

Fails to recognise the complexities and limitation of English language.

Undermines public confidence in the law