Introduction to Business Law
SAM NORTH CAMPUS
Table of Contents
1.1 Literal Rule
1.12 Golden Rule
1.13 Mischief Rule
Figure 1.14 Advantages and Disadvantages of the Literal, Golden and Mischief Rules.
5 TASK 1a PART 2
1.2 Alternative Dispute Resolution
TASK 1a PART 3
1.3 Contract and Tort
1.33 Similarities and Differences of Contract and Tort Laws
10 1.34 Conclusion
2.0 Key Factors of a Valid Contract
2.2 Analysis of the Legal Position
2.3 Advice concerning the contractual liabilities between Lester and Mandy
13 2.4 Advice Concerning the Contractual Liabilities between Lester and Mandy
14 Works Cited
TASK 1a PART 1
A statute is a written law passed by a legislature on the state. Statutes set forth general propositions of law that courts apply to specific situations. A statute may forbid a certain act, direct a certain act, make a declaration, or set forth governmental mechanisms to aid society. Statutes set by Parliament are the foundation principles judges use to make decisions about cases they preside over. In doing so, they are expected to use statutory interpretation without modifying the original meaning of the Act. As such some of the basic rules that apply are the Literal Rule, the Golden Rule and the Mischief Rule. 1.1 Literal Rule
The literal rule is appropriately named as it uses the actual grammatical meaning of words in a statute. Complications or absurdities may arise from this, as the English language in itself is complicated, in that its words have different meanings depending on the context by which they are used, thus understanding parliament’s true intention can become construed. R v Harris (1836). In that case the defendant bit off his victim's nose. There was a statute that made it an offence 'to stab cut or wound' the court held that under the literal rule the act of biting did not come within the meaning of stab cut or wound as these words implied an instrument had to be used. Therefore the defendant's conviction was quashed. This approach may lead to inconsistent results depending on the person doing the interpretation. However judges do have some guidelines in form of the Interpretation Act. 1978.
1.12 Golden Rule
The golden rule is used in the instances where the literal rule leads to inconsistencies. The judge has the right to apply this rule when the true intent of parliament is thought to be misunderstood. Adler v George (1964). Under the Official Secrets Act 1920 it was an offence to obstruct a member of the armed forces 'in the vicinity' of a prohibited place. The defendant was actually in the prohibited place, rather than 'in the vicinity' of it, at the time of obstruction. The court applied the golden rule. Seeing that it would be absurd for a person to be liable if they were near to a prohibited place and not if they were actually in it. His conviction was therefore upheld.
1.13 Mischief Rule
The mischief rule is the rule that seeks to determine the intended meaning of parliament, when passing a statute. Mischief occurs when there is a misinterpretation of a statute. Royal College of Nursing v DHSS 1981. This case The Royal College of Nursing brought an action challenging the legality of the involvement of nurses in carrying out abortions. The offence against the Person Act 1861 makes it an offence for any person to carry out an abortion. The Abortion Act 1967 provided that it would be an absolute defence for a medically registered practitioner (that is a doctor) to carry out abortions provided certain conditions were satisfied. Advances in medical science meant surgical abortions were largely replaced with hormonal abortions and it was common for these to be administered by nurses. It was legal for...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document