Internal Aids of Statutory Interpretation
- Created by: DeVanté
- Created on: 02-04-14 09:39
View mindmap
- SI- Internal Aids
- Rules of Language
- Noscitur a sociis
- This applies where there is a list of items in the statute and the item under consideration is included in the list, but the context of the items in the list suggest that the item should not be in the list.
- Eg if a statute stated it applied to cat baskets, toy mice, flea collars and food, under this rule a loaf of bread would not be within the remit of the statute
- Inland Revenue v Frere [1964]
- Eg if a statute stated it applied to cat baskets, toy mice, flea collars and food, under this rule a loaf of bread would not be within the remit of the statute
- This applies where there is a list of items in the statute and the item under consideration is included in the list, but the context of the items in the list suggest that the item should not be in the list.
- Ejusdem Generis
- This applies where a statute contains a list of items followed by and 'other...'. When the courts are determining what is counts as 'other' they will look at the context of the things in the list
- Eg a statute which states it applies to lions, tigers, cheetahs and other animals would apply also to leopards but not to a horse.
- Powell v Kempton Park [1897]
- This applies where a statute contains a list of items followed by and 'other...'. When the courts are determining what is counts as 'other' they will look at the context of the things in the list
- Expressio unius est exclusion alterius
- This means the express mention of one thing excludes all others.
- R v Inhabitants of Sedgely (1831)
- So if a statute stated it applies to lions and tigers (without stating and other) it would only apply to lions and tigers and not leopards and cheetahs
- This means the express mention of one thing excludes all others.
- Noscitur a sociis
- Presumptions
- Where a statute does not expressly provide otherwise, it is presumed the following apply
- The Statute does not affect the monarch
- Statutes do not act retrospectivley
- Existing rights are not to be interfered with
- Statutes do not change common law
- Mens rea is required for criminal liability
- Where a statute does not expressly provide otherwise, it is presumed the following apply
- Long Title of the Act
- Explanatory Notes
- Other Sections of the act
- Definition Sections of the act
- Rules of Language
Comments
No comments have yet been made