Courtney Lowes
Unit 23
P8
Literal rule This is the main rule that judges will usually
use, it means that they will apply a word its
ordinary meaning that it has within the
dictionary.
LNER v Berriman – A worker had died whilst
he was carrying out a maintenance routine
check on the railway line whilst he was at
work. The literal rule was applied in this
case and his wife got compensation but
only for relaying and repairing.
Whitley v Chappell – A person had tried to
vote pretending to be another person who
was on the voter list, however the person
was deceased. The defendant was
therefore found not guilty as you cannot
impersonate a person who is dead as they
cannot vote.
Golden rule This is when they will look at the literal
meaning but the court can avoid the
interpretation if it would lead to absurd
results in the case on hand.
Re sigsworth – A son had murdered his
mother but she had not left a will when she
had died. In ordinary circumstances it would
mean that any property and money she had
would be left to the next of kin. However the
court applied the golden rule in the situation
so that the son would not inherit the money.
R v Allen – Mr Allen who was the defendant
was found guilty under the offences against
the person act as he married when his
partner was still alive and they did not get a
divorce. The golden rule was applied so that
marry was meaning carrying out a
ceremony.
Mischief Rule The judge would have more discretion if
they were using this rule; the court would
have to look into the law before the act was
passed to see if they could find a gap that
the act intended to cover.
Smith v Hughes – Women were standing on
their balconies and were trying to get the
Unit 23
P8
Literal rule This is the main rule that judges will usually
use, it means that they will apply a word its
ordinary meaning that it has within the
dictionary.
LNER v Berriman – A worker had died whilst
he was carrying out a maintenance routine
check on the railway line whilst he was at
work. The literal rule was applied in this
case and his wife got compensation but
only for relaying and repairing.
Whitley v Chappell – A person had tried to
vote pretending to be another person who
was on the voter list, however the person
was deceased. The defendant was
therefore found not guilty as you cannot
impersonate a person who is dead as they
cannot vote.
Golden rule This is when they will look at the literal
meaning but the court can avoid the
interpretation if it would lead to absurd
results in the case on hand.
Re sigsworth – A son had murdered his
mother but she had not left a will when she
had died. In ordinary circumstances it would
mean that any property and money she had
would be left to the next of kin. However the
court applied the golden rule in the situation
so that the son would not inherit the money.
R v Allen – Mr Allen who was the defendant
was found guilty under the offences against
the person act as he married when his
partner was still alive and they did not get a
divorce. The golden rule was applied so that
marry was meaning carrying out a
ceremony.
Mischief Rule The judge would have more discretion if
they were using this rule; the court would
have to look into the law before the act was
passed to see if they could find a gap that
the act intended to cover.
Smith v Hughes – Women were standing on
their balconies and were trying to get the
