Question- 13 निर्वचन के सिद्धान्त 'स्वर्णिम नियम' की व्याख्या इस पर आधारित निर्णीत वादों की सहायता से कीजिए।
Explain the 'Golden Rule' of interpretation with the help of decided cases based on it.
Answer-13
The 'Golden Rule' of interpretation is a principle used in
statutory interpretation to resolve ambiguities in a statute or piece of
legislation. It is used when the literal meaning of the words in a statute
leads to an absurd or unreasonable result. The Golden Rule suggests that, in
such cases, the meaning of the statute should be altered to avoid that
absurdity, but only to the extent necessary. The rule thus helps in giving
effect to the true legislative intent while maintaining the purpose of the law.
Here’s a point-wise explanation of the Golden Rule of
interpretation with relevant cases:
1. Literal Meaning
• The first
step is to look at the literal meaning of the statute. Courts begin by applying
the plain and ordinary meaning of the words used in the statute.
• Case: R
v. Judge of the City of London Court (1892)
o The court
held that statutes should first be interpreted according to their literal
meaning, unless it produces an absurd result.
2. Absurdity or Unreasonable Result
• If the
literal interpretation leads to an absurd, inconsistent, or unreasonable result
that contradicts the intention of the law, the Golden Rule permits the
modification of the literal meaning.
• Case: Re
Sigsworth (1935)
o In this
case, a son murdered his mother and would have inherited her estate under a
literal interpretation of the inheritance law. The court altered the meaning,
holding that he should not benefit from the crime he committed, thus avoiding
an absurd result.
3. Modification of Literal Meaning
• The court
may modify the wording of the statute but only to the minimum extent necessary
to avoid the absurd result. The purpose is to remain as faithful to the statute
as possible while avoiding outcomes that conflict with common sense or justice.
• Case:
Becke v. Smith (1836)
o The court
used the Golden Rule to modify the meaning of a statute, ensuring that it
didn’t produce an unreasonable result. The statute was intended to protect
certain rights, and the modification ensured that its spirit remained intact.
4. Avoiding Injustice or Imbalance
• The
Golden Rule is applied to avoid any injustice or imbalance that may arise due
to the literal interpretation of a statute. It prevents situations where the
strict letter of the law would produce an unjust outcome.
• Case:
Adler v. George (1964)
o The
defendant was charged under a statute which stated that it was an offense to
obstruct "in the vicinity of a prohibited place." The defendant
argued that the phrase should be taken literally, meaning obstructing
"outside" the prohibited area. The court applied the Golden Rule,
ruling that it was absurd to not include someone obstructing within the
prohibited place, and found the defendant guilty.
5. Application in Equity
• The
Golden Rule allows courts to adapt statutes to achieve fairness and equity,
ensuring that the legislative intent is honored without creating unintended
consequences.
• Case:
Whitely v. Chappell (1868)
o A person
impersonated a dead person to vote. The statute used the phrase "person
entitled to vote," and the defendant argued that the dead person could
still be considered a "person." The court, applying the Golden Rule,
decided that the term “person” was intended to apply only to living individuals
and not to the dead, to avoid an absurd result.
6. Judicial Discretion and Restraint
• While the
Golden Rule allows the courts to modify a statute’s meaning, it requires
judicial restraint. Courts are careful not to deviate too far from the literal
meaning unless absolutely necessary to prevent an absurd outcome.
• Case:
Jones v. Tower Boot Co Ltd (1997)
o The issue
was whether the protection of employees under the Race Relations Act applied to
incidents occurring outside the workplace. The court applied the Golden Rule to
interpret the scope of the statute, ensuring that it fulfilled the legislative
intent of protecting employees from racial discrimination.
Conclusion
The Golden Rule is used in statutory interpretation when the
application of a statute in its literal sense leads to absurd or unjust
outcomes. By modifying the literal meaning, courts seek to fulfill the
legislative intent while avoiding absurdities, contradictions, or unfair
results. The rule is flexible but must be applied cautiously to preserve the
balance between the words of the statute and the purpose for which it was
enacted.
Comments
Post a Comment