the Purposive Approach
- Created by: Zaynab
- Created on: 22-12-20 15:25
View mindmap
- the purposive approach
- requires judges to look at purpose, reason or object of act + interpret passages in accordance with 'spirit' of statute.
- modern version of mischief rule
- more flexible than literal and golden rule
- allows judge to add and ignore words, permits to make decisions with what act seeks to achieve
- Consequence - court entitled to look far beyond words of act. look into what Pment concerned about when they passed Act.
- R v Rodgers. CoA question whether those who aren't of British origin constituted racial group under Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Baroness Hale: yes, as would it be for question of whether 'foreigners' constitute such a group.
- an approach to Stat. Interp. in which courts look to see what is purpose of the law
- R v Registrar-General, Ex-parte Smith (1990). Court said despite plain language of the Act, Pment could not have intended to promote serious crime. Ruled Reg-gen. didn't have to supply any information
- R (on the application of Quinatavalle) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (2003). HoL decided embyros produced through cell nuclear replacement were covered by 1990 Act
- Coltmann v Bibby Tankers (1987). HoL applied purposive approach and held employer liable on basis that ship was equipment. If more restrictive, liberal approach taken, employer may not be liable.
- Advantages
- Law Com described rule as 'rather more satisfactory approach'.
- Ads generally same as mischief rule
- Same approach used by Court in other EU countries, brings UK courts into line with European Counterparts (always be used when judiciary interpreting European Legislation).
- More likely to give effect to intention of Pment
- Disadvantages
- Too much power to unelected judiciary
- Judges can overstep their role by making decisions based on public policy
Comments
No comments have yet been made