Literal Rule Interpretation of Statutes скачать в хорошем качестве

Literal Rule Interpretation of Statutes

The Literal rule means that the judges should interpret the law literally, based on the text or the words of the law, using the ordinary and plain meanings of the words used in the law. Over the years, the courts have set out some basic principles on how to use the literal rule: Every word in the statute should be given meaning, as no word is unnecessarily used – which means that the law should be read in its entirety. Selectively reading some parts and ignoring other parts is not literal interpretation. One should not presume any omissions and nothing should be added by the Court. – which means that the court should not assume that the legislators missed out something and try to supply that missing part… whether something seems extra or something seems missing, the interpretation should be literal. Normally all words and terms are interpreted as per their ordinary meanings. If any term is supposed to have a special meaning, then the statute should specify the same. Usually in the definitions section. Technical words are given ordinary technical meanings if the statute has not specified any other. It should not be assumed that the statute is implying something, leading to the judge introducing anything extra into the statute. What is written is to be interpreted as-is. Words undergo shifts in meaning in course of time, so the interpretation should be on the basis of when the statute was written. – for example, before the industrial revolution, the word manufacture meant ‘made by hand’ and it evolved from the Latin term ‘Manu factus’. And now manufacture means mass production, usually in a factory. And Words acquire significance from their context – for example, if a statute is related to fashion or apparel, the word ‘clutch’ may refer to a woman’s purse. Where as in a law related to automobiles, clutch will refer to a transmission component of a vehicle. And a consideration, before applying the literal rule is that it should not be applied if it is leading to an absurd result or it is defeating the purpose of the statute. And if one of the parties is claiming that the words used in a statute actually mean something other their normal meaning, then that party has to prove the same.