- Gives Judge more discretion than the other two rules.
- Court should look to see what the law was before the act was made in order to find the gap and therefore what 'mischief' in wanted to cover.
- Court interprets the act in a way to cover this 'mischief'.
Smith V Hughes- was an offence for a common pristitute to loiter or solicit in a street or public place for the purpose of prostitution. Women were in windows and on balconies, was this classed as 'street'. Rule was to clear up streets so held they were guilty.
Corkery V Carpenter- man drunk and riding bicycle from pub. Was the bike a 'carriage'? Held D was a danger to himself and others and this was the mischief that was trying to be covered.
Comments
No comments have yet been made