QUESTION

THE AIM OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION IS TO UNLOCK THE MIND OF THE

LEGISLATURE. CITING RELEVANT CASES. DISCUSS HOW THE COURT ENDEAVOURS
TO GIVE EFFECT TO THIS AIM WHEN DEALING WITH CASES THAT CAME BEFORE
THEM.

INTRODUCTION

The term interpretation means “To give meaning to”. Government is divided into
three wings namely the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Interpretation of
statues in order to provide justice is the primary function of the judiciary.

The duty of the court is to expound the law as it stands, and to “leave the remedy (if
one be resolved upon) to others” said Lord Birkenhead LC, Sutters v Briggs [1922] 1.
A.C.

In other words ‘the words of a statute must not be overruled by the judges, but
reform of the law must be in the hands Parliament’. Maxwell On The Interpretation of
Statutes P.St Langan.

The most common rule of interpretation is that every part of the statute must be
understood in a harmonious manner by reading and construing every part of it
together. The maxim “A Verbis legis non est recedendum” means that you must not
vary the words of the statute while interpreting it.

The intend of interpreting statutes is to establish the intention of the legislature

conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used.

DEFINING TERMS

Statutory Interpretation

To interpret a statute is find a proper meaning so that it may be applied to a

particular case, Frederick J De Sloovere (1936).

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

“Interpretation is complicated by very nature of. Some statutes are incompetently

drafted creating further complications”. Introduction to Zimbabwean Law, Lovemore
Madhuku.

The legislature strives for clarity and precision when drafting legislation, the courts
will often go to great lengths to determine the true meaning of a statute.
It is in the interest of fairness and justice for a court to properly apply legislation to
case facts. Statutory interpretation is therefore an essential process, which cannot be
overlooked. It is easy to see why statutory interpretation might be considered a skill
of language, rather than law.

“There is, however, no rule or principle that tells the court what rule or principle to
apply. Rather, the courts tend to adopt that rule or principle which is convenient for
the case and the decision intended. Introduction to Zimbabwean Law, Lovemore
Madhuku.

Literal Rule (Cardinal Rule)

Bayley J in the case of R v Ramsgate (inhabitants)(1827) 6 B&C 712 stated that “It is
very desirable in all cases to adhere to the words of an Act of Parliament, giving to
them sense which is their natural import in the order in which they are placed”

Thus first and foremost in construction words should to all extend be given meaning
used in their Technical meaning (if they have acquired one) or otherwise their
Ordinary meaning i.e. they are construed according to the rules of grammar.

“The length and detail of modern legislature” wrote Lord Evershed MR “has
undoubtedly reinforced the claim of literal construction as the only safe rule.

Mischief Rule (Purposive Rule)

Mischief or Object of enactment is common and will often provide the solution to a
problem of Interpretation. In the case of Smith and Hughes, It was held that
prostitutes who attracted a passerby from balconies or windows were soliciting, “in a
street” within section (i) of the Street Offences Act 1959, “for my part said Lord
Parker CJ “I approach the matter considering what is the mischief aimed by this Act.
Everybody knows that this was an Act intended to clean up the streets to enable
people to walk along the streets without being molested or solicited by common
prostitutes”

The Golden Rule (Subjective Rule)

It is a modification of the Literal rule; Parke B stated that, “It is a very useful rule in
the construction to adhere to the ordinary meaning used and to grammatical
construction, unless that is at variance with the intention of the legislature…”
Lovemore Madhuku in Introduction to Zimbabwean law aptly put it “The essence of
the Golden Rule is that the starting point to interpretation is the literal meaning, but
this subject to the consequences. If the consequences lead to a glaring absurdity… the
Literal meaning must be abandoned. Section 77(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1960
requires the driver of a vehicle to stop after an accident. Winn LJ in Divisional Court,
said that he would not wish to give the impression that a momentary pause after an
accident would exempt the driver of a car from the necessity of stopping to give
particulars. “The phrase the driver of the motor shall stop” is properly to be
construed as meaning the driver of the motor vehicle shall stop it and remained
where he has stopped it for such a period of time as in the prevailing circumstances,
having regard in particular to the character of the road or place in which the accident
happened, will provide a sufficient period to enable persons who have a right so to
do, and reasonable ground for so doing, to require of him direct and personally the
information which may be required under the section.”

Conclusion

The issue in Statutory Interpretation theory is the fundamental conception of the role
of the judges…should a judge acts as a mini-legislator, filling in the interstice of a
statute and giving it a voice where it is silent, to advance what the judge determines
to be a legislative purpose or intent. Judicial Tendencies in Statutory Constructions:
Differing Views on the Role of Judges (2002) J M Walker JR (Chief Judge United States
Court of Appeals.

Bibliography

Maxwell On The Interpretation of Statutes 12th edition (1976) P.St Langan, Sweet and

Maxwell Publishers,

Bombay.

Introduction to Zimbabwean Law, Lovemore Madhuku (2010) Weaver Press Harare.

Differing Views on the Role of Judges (2002) J M Walker JR