Question 1

The interpretation of secondary legislation differs to that of primary legislation for which of the following reasons (select all that apply)?

Accepted Answer

A)   The existence of a parent Act means that words used in the secondary legislation are to be read as having the same meaning as in the parent Act.
B)   Because the courts have the power to declare secondary legislation invalid where it exceeds the power granted to it by Parliament; thus, both the scope of the powers within the delegated legislation and the scope of the grant contained in the parent Act need interpretation.
C)   Such legislation is only of secondary importance in the legal order and thus judges are rarely called upon to interpret it.
D)   The courts will be reluctant to interpret any delegated legislation in a way that conflicts with an established and fundamental principle of common law. A, B, D

Question 2

Which of the following is not part of the rules laid down in Pepper v Hart that allow reference to Parliamentary materials?

Accepted Answer

A)   The legislation must be ambiguous or obscure, or lead to an absurdity.
B)   Once the legislation is found to be ambiguous, the court must ascertain that the golden rule is not applicable.
C)   The material relied upon consists of one or more statements by a minister or other promoter of the bill, together with any such other Parliamentary material as is necessary to understand such statements and their effect.
D)   The statements relied upon are clear. B

Question 3

Hansard can only be made reference to in very limited circumstances following the strict guidelines set down in Pepper v Hart. The court must be persuaded that such a reference is justified. Nonetheless, it may consider extracts from Hansard de bene esse. Such arguments have, however, generally fallen from favour.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False  True

Question 4

The mischief rule is, historically and formally, narrower than the golden rule because the mischief that the Act intended to correct was determinable from the Preamble of the Act itself. It can now be said, however, that, to some judges, the distinction between the mischief and the golden rules is virtually non-existent; both have become subsumed by a general purposive approach.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 5

Match each Latin maxim to its meaning.
-In pari materia.

Accepted Answer

A)   Where a list of things appears, it is logical to argue that the legislature specifically intended to exclude all other things - 'the expression of one thing is to the exclusion of others'. It will not apply when words like 'includes' or 'such as' appear in the list.
B)   When general words follow a list of specific words, then the general words should be read according to the genus of the preceding specific words.
C)   This rule means that a word is known by its associates and the meaning of a word is therefore to be determined by its surrounding words.
D)   A word used in one Act can be given the same meaning in another, if the two Acts are dealing with the same matter.

Question 6

The case of Davis v Johnson demonstrates that the style of interpretation adopted by a judge can easily be categorised as 'grand' or 'formal'.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 7

What is the problem with the 'rules of interpretation' and why are they dangerous (select all that apply)?

Accepted Answer

A)   Because they are the only way in which a statute can be interpreted.
B)   Because the term 'rule' gives the impression of a mathematical formula that, if applied, means one cannot go wrong. This is not the case.
C)   They are a useful starting point, but they do not tell one how a statute is actually interpreted.
D)   They should really only be seen as approaches to interpretation; the name 'rule' is misleading.

Question 8

Section 1 of the Countryside Act states that 'the driving of cars, motorcycles, lorries, tractors and other vehicles over public rights of way is a criminal offence'.
You are the prosecuting barrister in a case where the defendant has 'driven' a horse and cart over a public right of way. Which of the following maxims would you seek to employ and what would your argument be?

Accepted Answer

A)   I would use eiusdem generis to argue that the genus is clearly vehicles that have wheels and are capable of being driven by a person, and section 1 should therefore be interpreted so as to include horse and cart.
B)   I would use eiusdem generis to argue that the genus is clearly vehicles that are motor-powered and that horse and cart cannot therefore be read into this section.
C)   I would use noscitur a sociis to argue that the surrounding words are all motor-powered vehicles and that a horse and cart cannot therefore be read into this section.
D)   I would use expressio unius est exclusio alterius to argue that, because horse and cart are not included in the list, the legislature has specifically excluded them.

Question 9

Match each rule of interpretation with its meaning.
-The golden rule.

Accepted Answer

A)   The use of only the plain and ordinary, literal meaning of the words, because these are the words specifically chosen by the draftsman.
B)   Putting the words in the context of the statute as a whole and giving them their ordinary meaning, unless this produces an absurd result, in which case, the judge should give the words another contextual meaning.
C)   Ascertaining what the draftsman intended by the word, by examining the general purpose of the section and its social, economic or political context.
D)   Looking at the previous common law and the history of the Act to ascertain what problem (or mischief)  the draftsman sought to remedy.

Question 10

Section 2 of the Curfew and Civil Disorder Act 1998 states that: 'Under this Act 'lawful excuse' shall be limited to matters of emergency, public concern or other essential purpose.'
The Hansard reports reveal that, in relation to the Act, the Home Secretary, in response to a question in Parliament about the meaning of 'shall be limited to matters of urgency, public concern or other essential purpose' said: 'Clause 2 is very straightforward. The use of the word urgency is to denote a matter in need of immediate action or attention: a situation of necessity.'
How, and when, can counsel use the statement from Hansard in his/her argument regarding the meaning of the word 'emergency' contained in section 2 of the Act?

Accepted Answer

A)   The statement can never be used because the Home Secretary is discussing the word 'urgency', which has been changed to 'emergency' during the passage of the bill through Parliament.
B)   The statement can be used in argument as long as the rules in Pepper v Hart are satisfied.
C)   The statement can only used by counsel for the defence because section 2 can only be read eiusdem generis.
D)   The Home Secretary is talking in Parliament in answer to a question rather than reading out the explanatory notes accompanying the bill; consequently, the statement cannot be used.

Question 11

Match each Latin maxim to its meaning.
-Eiusdem generis.

Accepted Answer

A)   Where a list of things appears, it is logical to argue that the legislature specifically intended to exclude all other things - 'the expression of one thing is to the exclusion of others'. It will not apply when words like 'includes' or 'such as' appear in the list.
B)   When general words follow a list of specific words, then the general words should be read according to the genus of the preceding specific words.
C)   This rule means that a word is known by its associates and the meaning of a word is therefore to be determined by its surrounding words.
D)   A word used in one Act can be given the same meaning in another, if the two Acts are dealing with the same matter.

Question 12

Match each rule of interpretation with its meaning.
-The literal rule.

Accepted Answer

A)   The use of only the plain and ordinary, literal meaning of the words, because these are the words specifically chosen by the draftsman.
B)   Putting the words in the context of the statute as a whole and giving them their ordinary meaning, unless this produces an absurd result, in which case, the judge should give the words another contextual meaning.
C)   Ascertaining what the draftsman intended by the word, by examining the general purpose of the section and its social, economic or political context.
D)   Looking at the previous common law and the history of the Act to ascertain what problem (or mischief)  the draftsman sought to remedy.

Question 13

When can a statute be read in pari materia?

Accepted Answer

A)   When the same Minister has promoted the bill.
B)   When at least two judges at the level of Court of Appeal or above have pronounced two statutes to be of the same matter.
C)   When two statutes have been drafted by the same draftsmen.
D)   When the statute concerns the same matter as another.

Question 14

Which of the following is the correct analysis of Coltman v Bibby Tankers?

Accepted Answer

A)   The word 'includes' in that particular Act meant that the list was exhaustive. This was determined by reference to the other sections where lists were given.
B)   The word 'includes' in that particular Act meant that the list was non-exhaustive. This was determined by reference to the other sections where lists were given.
C)   The case is authority for the proposition that the use of the word 'includes' in a statute will always mean that the list is open-ended.
D)   The case is authority for the proposition that the use of the word 'includes' will always mean that the list is exhaustive, so anything not specifically included in the list cannot be read into it.

Question 15

Which of the following statements apply to the purposive approach (select all that apply)?

Accepted Answer

A)   An 'absurdity' means something wider than irreconcilability with the rest of the Act and judges may therefore probe into the purpose of the Act.
B)   The purposive approach can be described as an examination of the external context of the Act.
C)   Although once used extensively, the purposive approach is no longer fashionable with the judiciary.
D)   The influence of EU law has meant that the courts are using this approach more and more.

Question 16

Section 1 of the Curfew and Civil Disorder Act 1998 provides that: 'It shall be an offence to be present in large groups on a street or in a park or in a public place during the hours of darkness without lawful excuse.'
You are counsel for the defence. Your client is accused of organising a demonstration in a village hall. Which of the following maxims would you use and what would your argument be?

Accepted Answer

A)   I would argue that it would be grossly unjust to make my client guilty of an offence for organising a demonstration for the public good in a village hall, because the hall was small and there was no damage or injury caused. It cannot possibly have been the intention of Parliament to outlaw such peaceful and small demonstrations because to do so would be to undermine the principle of free speech.
B)   I would argue that 'public place' is to be read noscitur a sociis with 'street' and 'park'. These words clearly indicate a public environment to which members of the pubic have access and the same is true of a village green.
C)   I would argue that 'public place' is to be read eiusdem generis. As the genus of 'street' and 'park' can be taken to mean an open-air place to which all of the public has access, it is clear that a public place cannot include closed environments such as a village hall to which all of the public cannot have access. My client has therefore not committed an offence.
D)   I would argue that 'public place' is to be read noscitur a sociis with 'street' and 'park'. 'Public place' cannot be taken to mean a closed environment to which, by its very nature, the public, as a whole, cannot have access, when the surrounding words 'street' and 'park' clearly indicate an open-air environment to which all of the public has access. My client has therefore not committed an offence.

Question 17

Interpretation of a word or phrase, within its internal context, means that it will be interpreted within the context of the statute or section of the statute itself, and not by reference to the wider, external context of the Act.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 18

Match each Latin maxim to its meaning.
-Expressio unius est exclusio alterius.

Accepted Answer

A)   Where a list of things appears, it is logical to argue that the legislature specifically intended to exclude all other things - 'the expression of one thing is to the exclusion of others'. It will not apply when words like 'includes' or 'such as' appear in the list.
B)   When general words follow a list of specific words, then the general words should be read according to the genus of the preceding specific words.
C)   This rule means that a word is known by its associates and the meaning of a word is therefore to be determined by its surrounding words.
D)   A word used in one Act can be given the same meaning in another, if the two Acts are dealing with the same matter.

Question 19

'The golden rule is a bridge between literalism and purposiveness.'

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Question 20

Words used in statutes have a precise and accurate meaning, and anyone can 'look up' the law in a statute.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

Exam 8: Making Sense of Statutes

The interpretation of secondary legislation differs to that of primary legislation for which of the following reasons (select all that apply) ?

Which of the following is not part of the rules laid down in Pepper v Hart that allow reference to Parliamentary materials?

Match each Latin maxim to its meaning. -In pari materia.

The case of Davis v Johnson demonstrates that the style of interpretation adopted by a judge can easily be categorised as 'grand' or 'formal'.

What is the problem with the 'rules of interpretation' and why are they dangerous (select all that apply) ?

Match each rule of interpretation with its meaning. -The golden rule.

Match each Latin maxim to its meaning. -Eiusdem generis.

Match each rule of interpretation with its meaning. -The literal rule.

When can a statute be read in pari materia?

Which of the following is the correct analysis of Coltman v Bibby Tankers?

Which of the following statements apply to the purposive approach (select all that apply) ?

Interpretation of a word or phrase, within its internal context, means that it will be interpreted within the context of the statute or section of the statute itself, and not by reference to the wider, external context of the Act.

Match each Latin maxim to its meaning. -Expressio unius est exclusio alterius.

'The golden rule is a bridge between literalism and purposiveness.'

Words used in statutes have a precise and accurate meaning, and anyone can 'look up' the law in a statute.