Question-12 रिष्टि का नियम अथवा अनिष्ट परिहार नियम क्या है? निर्णीत वादों की सहायता से विस्तृत विवेचना कीजिए।
What is the Mischief Rule? Discuss in detail with the help of some decided cases.
Answer- 11
The Mischief Rule is one of the key rules used for the
interpretation of statutes. It helps judges understand the intent of the law
and resolve ambiguities in the text of a statute. The Mischief Rule aims to
determine the "mischief" or problem that the statute intended to
address and to interpret the provisions of the law in a way that eliminates
that mischief.
Key Points of the Mischief Rule
1. Origin of
the Mischief Rule:
o The
Mischief Rule has its origins in Heydon's Case (1584), where the judges
outlined four things that must be considered when interpreting a statute:
1. What was
the law before the statute was made?
2. What was
the mischief or defect for which the common law did not provide?
3. What
remedy did Parliament intend to provide for the mischief?
4. The true
reason for the remedy.
2. Purpose
of the Mischief Rule:
o The
primary objective is to focus on the intent behind the statute and eliminate
the mischief it sought to address.
o Judges
apply this rule to avoid the literal or strict interpretation of the statute,
which might lead to absurd or unjust outcomes, and instead aim to fulfill the
statute’s purpose.
3. Application
of the Rule:
o When
there is ambiguity in the statute, judges look at the problem the statute was
meant to solve, and interpret its provisions accordingly, rather than merely
relying on the literal words.
4. Mischief
Rule vs. Other Rules:
o Literal
Rule: Interprets the statute based on the ordinary meaning of the words. It is
more rigid and doesn't account for the statute's purpose.
o Golden
Rule: Interprets the statute in a way that avoids absurdity but can still be
close to a literal interpretation.
o Purposive
Rule: A more modern approach that interprets the statute based on the intent of
the law, broader than the Mischief Rule.
Application of the Mischief Rule with Case Examples
1. Heydon’s
Case (1584):
o This case
is the foundation of the Mischief Rule. The court, in this case, interpreted a
statute using the rule by looking at the mischief the statute sought to
address. The statute in question related to the concealment of land, and the
judges looked into the problem the statute was meant to resolve and interpreted
the law accordingly.
2. Smith v.
Hughes (1960):
o This case
involved a law that prohibited "soliciting in a street or public
place." The defendants were prostitutes who were soliciting from
balconies. The court applied the Mischief Rule and interpreted the statute to
include balconies, as the mischief was street solicitation, not limited to
those on the ground.
3. R v.
District Auditor (1993):
o The case
concerned the interpretation of a statute that gave power to a local authority.
The court, through the Mischief Rule, interpreted the statute in a way that
aligned with the mischief the statute was intended to address: the effective
control of public funds. Thus, the court did not stick strictly to the literal
wording but applied the intent behind the law.
4. Eastbourne
Borough Council v. Stirling (2000):
o The case
involved a taxi licensing issue. The statute forbade plying for hire without a
proper license. The defendant was driving a taxi but did not pick up passengers
in the traditional way. The court interpreted the law using the Mischief Rule,
considering the underlying mischief of ensuring passenger safety and fair
regulation of public transportation.
Conclusion
The Mischief Rule is crucial in ensuring that statutes are
interpreted in a way that effectively addresses the problems they were designed
to fix. By considering the intent behind the law, judges can avoid injustices
that might arise from overly literal or rigid interpretations. It represents a
more flexible approach in statutory interpretation that ensures the law
fulfills its purpose.
Comments
Post a Comment