Principles of Interpretation of Statute

This slide is make foe help of law student to understand the Principles of Interpretation

1. INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES By BHRIGURAJ MOURYA Assistant Professor College of Law and Legal Studies

2. INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

3. Object of Interpretation To understand the meaning of unambiguous and contradictory words. To know the intention of legislature To explain the meaning of word in change situation. To make effective the old statutes in modern time To develop some technology to understand the statutes and words used in statutes . To understand  the spirit of the Statutes from the language. To understand the Internal and External aids of interpretation .

4. Definition of interpretation

5. Salmond “ The interpretation or construction is meant the process by which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the Legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed ”

6. Cooley “ Interpretation differs from construction in that the former is the art of finding out the true sense of any form of words; that is, the sense which their author intended to convey; and of enabling others to derive from them the same idea which the author intended to convey. Construction, on the other hand, is the drawing of conclusions, respecting subjects that lie beyond the direct expression of the text from elements known from and given in the text; conclusions which are in the spirit though not within the letter of the law .

7. interpretation & construction

8. Importance of interpretation Useful to understand the meaning of statutes To understand the intention of legislation Useful for students, advocates and court to understand the legislation Understand the word used in statutes in particular or in general. For effective enforcement of legislation.

9. Kinds of statutes

10. Penal statutes Remedial statutes Repealing statutes Codified statutes Enabling statutes or validating Statute Disabling statutes Amending statutes Consolidating statutes On the basis of Objective

11. basis of Duration Perpetual statutes Temporary statutes

12. Classification on the Operation Prospective statutes – Retrospective statutes – Directory statutes – Mandatory statutes-

13. Rules of interpretation Literal rule Golden rule Mischief rule Reasonable interpretation Harmonious interpretation

14. Literal rule Litera Legis Grammatical rules General rules

15. The ordinary in ordinary meaning The words in natural meaning The words in grammatical meaning The scientific words in scientific meaning

16. According to Viscount Haldane, “if the language used has a natural meaning we cannot depart from that meaning unless, reading the statute as a whole, the context directs us to do so” .

17. Condition of literal rule of interpretation Statute may itself provide a special meaning for a term, which is usually to be found in the interpretation section. Technical words are given ordinary technical meaning if the statute has not specified any other. Words will not be inserted by implication. Words undergo shifts in meaning in course of time. It should always be remembered that words acquire significance from their context.

18. GOLDEN RULE OF INTERPRETATION GIVE WIDE MEANING OF WORDS GO TO BEYOND THE LIMIT OF MEANING OF WORDS MEANING OF WORD IN CHANG TIME AND SITUATION

19. Presumption

20. Presumption of Jurisdiction of court Statutes not violation of international law Presumption of extra territorial operation Presumption about the statutes effect on state

21. Presumption of Jurisdiction of court Ujjam Bai v. State of Utter Pradesh 1962 2. Bhimji v. Dundappa 1966

22. Statutes not violation of international law Mirza Ali Akbar v. United Arab Republic , 1956

23. Presumption of extra territorial operation G.D. Singh v government of India 1973 Ajay Agarwal v union of India 1993

24. Presumption about the statutes effect on state State of W.B. V union of India 1963

25. NOSCITUR A SOCIIS Associated words take their meaning from one another

26. Meaning Lord Macmillan “The meaning of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps”. (State of U.P. v. Renusagar Power Co. AIR 1988 SC 173 .)

27. Privy Council It is a legitimate rule of construction to construe words in an Act of Parliament with reference to words found in immediate connection with them

28. Gajendragadkar , J When two or more words which are susceptible of analogous meaning are coupled together, they are understood to be used in their cognate sense T. Venkata Reddy v. State of A.P., (1985) 3 SCC 198

29. . mangoo singh v election tribunal 1957 The word that “the municipal taxes in excess of one year demand” Deposit the taxes before the poll and not at time of nomination

30. State of Karnataka v. union of India 1978 Art. 194 of constitution of india

31. Rule of ejusdem generis SAME KINDS

32. When particular words pertaining to a class, category or genus are followed by general words, the general words are construed as limited to things of the same kind as those specified

33. U.P. STATE ELECTRIC BOARD V. HARISHANKER AIR 1979 SC 65 . The statute contains an enumeration of specific words; The subjects of enumeration constitute a class or category; That class or category is not exhausted by the enumeration; The general terms follow the enumeration; There is no indication of a different legislative intent

34. STATE OF BOMBEY V. ALI GULSHAN AIR 1955 SC 810 The worlds “ the state government may requisition for the purpose of state or any other public purpose .” S.6(4)a of Bombay land requisition Act, 1948

35. Hamdard dawakhana v union of India air 1965 sc 1167

36. Nagrik upbhokta manch v. union of India air 2002 sc 2405

37. Absoluta sentential expositore non indigent Means- Absolute and clear word not need to interpretation

38. Actus non facit reum , insi mens sit rea Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata , AIR 1976 SC 22 When a statute creates an offence, the question whether the offence involves the existence of mens rea as an essential element of it or whether the statute dispenses with it and creates strict liability are questions which have to be answered on a true construction of the statute

39. Workmen v. Associated Rubber Industry Ltd. (1985) 4 SCC 114 Goddard, C.J. and Wright, J “There is a presumption that mens rea an evil intention, or knowledge of the wrongfulness of the act, is an essential ingredient of every offence, but that presumption is liable to be displaced either by the words of the statute creating the offence or by the subject-matter with which it deals and both must be considered.”

40. Delegatus non potest delegare Delegated authority cant not delegate further

41. PARI MATERIA STUTATE HARI V DEPTY COMMSSIONER OF POLICE 1957

42. Ex post facto law Law after the fact Retrospective effect of law A law that makes illegal an act that was legal when committed , increases the penalties for an infraction after it has been committed, or changes the rules of evidence to make conviction easier.

43. Kinds of construction

44. Strict construction Beneficial construction Remedial construction Harmonious construction Reasonable construction Exceptional construction Liberal construction

45. Rule of Harmonious Construction When there is a conflict between two or more statues Not overlap to each other The maintain the harmonious meaning of such conflicting provisions .

46. Union of India v. B.S. Aggarwal (AIR 1998 S.C. 1537). It is a settled rule that an interpretation which results in hardship, injustice, inconvenience or anomaly should be avoided and that which supports the sense of justice should be adopted. The Court leans in favour of an interpretation which conforms to justice and fair play and prevents injustice

47. The need for Statutory Interpretation A broad term: “type known as the pit bull terrier” in Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. What does this word mean? Ambiguity: if a word has two or more meanings which is the one that should be used? New developments: e.g. in technology. In Royal College of Nursing v DHSS 1981 “medical practitioner” now includes nurses for the purposes of abortion Changes in the use of language: the meaning of a word might change, e.g. the meaning of “passenger” in Cheeseman v DPP 1990 A drafting error made by the parliamentary counsel who drafted the original bill, e.g. as a bill is amended on its way through Parliament

48. Introduction to statutory interpretation Statutory interpretation concerns the role of judges when trying to apply an Act of Parliament to an actual case. The wording of the Act may seem to be clear when it is drafted and checked by Parliament, but it may become problematic in the future. 75% of cases heard by the house of lords are concerned with statutory interpretation .

49. Main presumptions of the court 1. Presumption against a change in the common law 2. Presumption that mens rea is required in criminal cases 3. Presumption that the Crown is not bound by any statute unless the statute expressly says so 4. Presumption that legislation does not apply retrospectively

50. The rules of interpretation There are two approaches to statutory interpretation: the literal approach and the purposive approach . There are also three main rules of statutory interpretation that judges use to decide a case: the literal rule the golden rule the mischief rule

51. Three rules of interpretation Literal rule – words are given their ordinary grammatical meaning. Whiteley v Chappell: D was found not guilty of “impersonating [someone] entitled to vote” when he impersonated a dead man, as a dead person is not “entitled to vote”. Golden rule – the best interpretation of ambiguous words can be chosen to avoid an absurd result. The golden rule provides a kind of “escape route” when there is a problem with the literal rule. Allen: “Marry” = “go through a ceremony of marriage”. Narrow version. Re Sigsworth: Son not allowed to inherit from mother because he murdered her. Wider version. Mischief rule – looks at the gap in law prior to the Act and interprets words to “suppress the mischief”. Smith v Hughes: Prostitutes calling from a house to men in the streets were soliciting “in a street”. NB these three rules are all part of the literal approach : by using them judges are still trying to find/understand the meaning of the actual words in the statute. Even when using the mischief rule it is primarily the words of the statute that the judge is most concerned with.

52. Literal rule The literal rule respects parliamentary sovereignty. The judges take the ordinary and natural meaning of the word and apply it, even if doing so creates an absurd result. Lord Esher said in 1892: ‘The court has nothing to do with the question of whether the legislature has committed an absurdity.’

53. Literal Approach The Literal Approach gives words their ordinary grammatical meaning R v Judge of the City of London Court: “If the words of an act are clear then you must follow them even though they lead to a manifest absurdity. The court has nothing to do with the question whether the legislature has committed an absurdity” LNER v Berriman: Not “relaying or repairing” track but oiling points (maintenance) Leaves law-making to Parliament / respects democracy BUT assumes every Act will be perfectly drafted – Fisher v Bell Makes law more certain BUT can lead to “unfair” decisions or absurd results – LNER v Berriman

54. Pinner v Everett (1969) Lord Reid – “in determining the meaning of any words or phrase in statute, the first question to ask is always what is the natural and ordinary meaning of that word or phrase in its context of the statute.”

55. Whiteley v Chappell (1868) Defendant voted in the name of a deceased person when the law stated that ‘any person is entitled to vote at an election’.

56. Fisher v Bell (1961) This case concerned a flick knife displayed in a shop window. Lord Parker acquitted Bell under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 , even though it was obvious that this was exactly the sort of behaviour that Parliament intended to stop. He justified his decision because the draftsmen knew the legal term ‘ invitation to treat ’ (which would have been applicable in this case) but failed to include it.To respect Parliament’s sovereignty he had to infer that they had left it out on purpose .

57. Golden rule The golden rule is an extension of the literal rule. If the literal rule gives an absurd result, which is obviously not what Parliament intended, the judge should alter the words in the statute in order to produce a satisfactory result. Judges may used the narrow approach or the broad approach .

58. R v Allen (1872) R v Allen is an example of the narrow approach of the golden rule. The wording of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 had to be given a different interpretation for the crime of bigamy, because the way it was written meant that the crime could never be committed. The court used the golden rule and held that ‘marry’ meant ‘to go through a marriage ceremony’. Narrow approach

59. Adler v George (1964) Where there is only one literal meaning of a word or phrase, but to apply it would cause an absurdity, then under the broad approach the court will modify this meaning to avoid absurdity. Defendant charged under the Official Secrets Act 1920 which made it an offence to obstruct a member of the armed forces in the vicinity of a prohibited place. Defendant claimed he was ‘in’ not ‘in the vicinity of’. Court applied broad approach and applied the word ‘in’ to mean in the vicinity of and changed the meaning of the word. Broad approach

60. Mischief rule The mischief rule (or purposive approach) gives judges the most flexibility when deciding what ‘mischief’ Parliament intended to stop. It was established in Heydon’s Case (1584). When using this rule, a judge should consider what the common law was before the Act was passed, what the problem was with that law, and what the remedy was that Parliament was trying to provide. Fill in the gaps left by the Act.

61. The mischief rule: Heydon’s case 1584 1. What was the common law before the making of the Act? 2. What was the mischief and defect for which the common law did not provide? 3. What was the remedy the Parliament hath resolved to cure the disease of the commonwealth? 4. The true reason of the remedy The court then interprets the Act in such a way as to cure the “mischief”

62. Smith v Hughes (1960) The defendants were charged with ‘soliciting in a street or public place for the purposes of prostitution’ contrary to the Street Offences Act 1959. They were soliciting from upstairs windows. Lord Parker used the mischief rule to convict, as he believed that the ‘mischief’ that Parliament had intended to stop was people in the street being bothered by prostitutes.

63. The Purposive Approach The mischief rule involves the court looking back to the common law position before the Act was passed to find the gap in the law that Parliament was trying to fill. The purposive approach focuses on what Parliament intended when passing the new law. It is a modern version of the mischief approach. The purposive approach has been used in: Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart (1993) – taxable benefits at private school Jones v Tower Boot Co. (1997) – racial abuse at work

64. Purposive Approach The Purposive Approach looks for the purpose of Parliament and interprets words accordingly. Jones v Tower Boot Co: “In the course of employment” included racial harassment that happened at work even though it was not part of the work Leads to justice in individual cases BUT makes law less certain Fills in the gaps in the law BUT leads to judicial law-making as opposed to democratic law-making Broad approach covers more situations BUT it is difficult to discover the intention of Parliament

65. Trends towards the purposive approach The literal approach is easily the more usual approach used by English courts But use of the purposive approach is increasing: Most European countries use it The ECJ uses it in interpreting European Law ( Marleasing ) , and therefore so must English courts The Human Rights Act 1998 says that legislation must be interpreted as far as possible to be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. This will involve “inserting words” in effect into Acts to comply with this purpose: Offen; Mendoza v Ghiadan

66. Bulmer Ltd v. J Bollinger SA (1974) Lord Denning compared the different approaches of UK and EU law. When UK was bound by EU law, it is necessary to use the purposive approach. Denning stated “No longer must they examine the words in meticulous detail. No longer must they argue about the precise grammatical sense. They must look to the purpose or intent.”

67. Principles of the Constitution

68. Popular Sovereignty Definition – The belief that people can and should govern themselves; the people rule. Example – People can run for office, campaign for individuals who run, or protest decisions made by others. Rule is not passed down based on blood line, or military coup.

69. Republicanism Definition – People vote for people to represent their views in government. (Representative Government ) You can’t have the whole population vote on everything, so you vote on people who share similar beliefs and allow them to vote. Direct election of Senators and Representatives.

70. Federalism Definition – Power is shared by the state and federal government. In our system, the national government does have ultimate authority, but states have a lot to say in what goes on as well. Powers for the national government = delegated powers, Powers for the state government = reserved powers, Powers shared between the national and the state are concurrent powers.

71. Separation of Powers Definition – The Federal government is divided into 3 branches - Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. This system prevents any one branch from gaining too much power and turning the country towards tyranny. Remember Charles de Montesquieu!

72. Checks and Balances Definition – Each of the 3 branches of government has a check on the other 2 branches. This balances power between the 3, ensuring that none of the branches seizes control. Example – Federal judges are nominated by the President, but have to be approved by Congress. Bills must be passed by both houses of the legislative branch, signed by the president, and can even be challenged in the courts.

73. Limited Government Definition – Everybody has to follow the same laws, even members of the government. If a Representative committed a crime, he/she would face a trial just like everybody else.

74. Individual Rights Definition – Personal liberties (Unalienable Rights) and privileges that people are born with and can not be taken away. The Bill of Rights, the first Ten Amendments, was created to specifically ensure the rights of the people.

75. THE PRINCIPLES OF CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION Explain, "In the interpretation of constitution, the judicial approach should be dynamic than static, pragmatic than pedantic, and elastic than rigid". Describe – Harmonious Construction, Doctrine of Pith and Substance, Colourable Legislation, Proviso, Doctrine of Eclipse, Principle of separation. What is the proper function of a proviso? Can it affect the enacting portion of a section as well?

76. Harmonious Construction It is a cardinal rule of construction that when there are in a statute two provisions which are in such conflict with each other, that both of them cannot stand together, they should possibly be so interpreted that effect can be given to both. And that construction which renders either of them inoperative and useless should not be adopted except in the last resort .

77. Harmonious Construction The Supreme Court held in Re Kerala Education Bill that in deciding the fundamental rights, the court must consider the directive principles and adopt the principle of harmonious construction so two possibilities are given effect as much as possible by striking a balance.

78. Harmonious Construction In Qureshi v. State of Bihar[2 ], The Supreme Court held that while the state should implement the directive principles, it should be done in such a way so as not to violate the fundamental rights. In Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading SA , it was held that if more than one interpretation is possible for a statute, then the court has to choose the interpretation which depicts the intention of the legislature.

79. General rules of interpretation of the Constitution 1 . If the words are clear and unambiguous, they must be given the full effect . 2. The constitution must be read as a whole. 3. Principles of harmonious construction must be applied. 4. The Constitution must be interpreted in a broad and literal sense. 5. The court has to infer the spirit of the Constitution from the language. 6. Internal and External aids may be used while interpreting. 7. The Constitution prevails over other statutes.

80. Principle of Colourable Legislation The doctrine of colourability is the idea that when the legislature wants to do something that it cannot do within the constraints of the constitution, it colours the law with a substitute purpose which will still allow it to accomplish its original goal. Maxim: “ Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo , prohibetur et per obliqum ” which means what cannot be done directly cannot also be done indirectly . The rule relates to the question of legislative competence to enact a law. Colourable Legislation does not involve the question of bonafide or malafide . A legislative transgression may be patent , manifest or direct or maybe disguised, covert or indirect. It is also applied to the fraud of the Constitution .

81. Principle of pith and substance Pith means ‘true nature or essence of something’ and substance means ‘the most important or essential part of something. The basic purpose of this doctrine is to determine under which head of power or field i.e. under which list (given in the seventh schedule) a given piece of legislation falls. Union & State Legislatures are supreme within their respective fields . They should not encroach/trespass into the field reserved to the other. If a law passed by one trespass upon the field assigned to the other—the Court by applying Pith & Substance doctrine, resolve the difficulty & declare whether the legislature concerned was competent to make the law.

82. State of Bombay v. FN Balsara Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 which prohibited the sale & possession of liquors in the State, was challenged on the ground that it incidentally encroached upon Imports & Exports of liquors across custom frontier – a Central subject. It was contended that the prohibition, purchase, use , possession , and sale of liquor will affect its import. The court held that act valid because the pith & substance fell under Entry 8 of State List and not under Entry 41 of Union List

83. Principle of eclipse The Doctrine of Eclipse says that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is not invalid. It is not dead totally but overshadowed by the fundamental right. The inconsistency ( conflict ) can be removed by a constitutional amendment to the relevant fundamental right so that eclipse vanishes and the entire law becomes valid.

84. Keshavan Madhava Menon v. The State of Bombay In this case, the law in question was an existing law at the time when the Constitution came into force . That existing law imposed on the exercise of the right guaranteed to the citizens of India by article 19(1)(g) restrictions which could not be justified as reasonable under clause (6) as it stood and consequently under article 13(1)[8] that existing law became void “to the extent of such inconsistency ”.

85. Principle of Severability The doctrine of severability provides that if an enactment cannot be saved by construing it consistent with its constitutionality, it may be seen whether it can be partly saved. Article 13 of the Constitution of India provides for Doctrine of severability which states that-All laws in force in India before the commencement of the Constitution shall be void in so far they are inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution.

86. AK Gopalan v. State of Madras In this case, the Supreme Court said that in case of repugnancy to the Constitution, only the repugnant provision of the impugned Act will be void and not the whole of it, and every attempt should be made to save as much as possible of the Act. If the omission of the invalid part will not change the nature or the structure of the object of the legislature, it is severable. It was held that except Section 14 all other sections of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 were valid, and since Section 14 could be severed from the rest of the Act, the detention of the petitioner was not illegal.

87. Principle of Territorial Nexus Article 245 (2) of the Constitution of India makes it amply clear that ‘No law made by Parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that it would have extra-territorial operation’. Thus legislation cannot be questioned on the ground that it has an extra-territorial operation. It is well established that the Courts of our country must enforce the law with the machinery available to them , and they are not entitled to question the authority of the Legislature in making a law which is extra-territorial .

88. The Doctrine of Territorial Nexus can be invoked under the following circumstances- Whether a particular state has extra-territorial operation. If there is a territorial nexus between the subject- matter of the Act and the state making the law

89. Tata Iron & Steel Company v. Bihar State The State of Bihar passed a Sales Tax Act for levy of sales tax whether the sale was concluded within the state or outside if the goods were produced, found and manufactured in the state. The court held there was sufficient territorial nexus and upheld the Act as valid. Whether there is sufficient nexus between the law and the object sought to be taxed will depend upon the facts and circumstances of a particular case

90. Principle of Implied powers Laws which are necessary and proper for the execution of the power or incidental to such power are called implied powers and these laws are presumed to be constitutional. In other words , constitutional powers are granted in general terms out of which implied powers must necessarily arise . Likewise, constitutional restraints are put in general terms out of which implied restraints must also necessarily establish. This is a Legal principle which states that, in general, the rights and duties of a legislative body or organization are determined from its functions and purposes as specified in its constitution or charter and developed in practice.

91. References;-  http://www.newbremenschools.org/Downloads/7%20Principl zes%20PowerPoint.pptx . https://www.legalbites.in/principles-constitutional-interpretation /.