The Significance Of Statutory Interpretation

The latter case of DPP v Carr (2002) shows many similarities, providing that arrest should and can only be used as a method of last resort, and must not be used for minor offences where the defendant can be identified . In this particular matter, a highly intoxicated Mr Carr was of the belief that police were accusing him of throwing a number of rocks, when this was not the case. This confusion led Mr Carr’s to use offensive language, which provoked the police officer to caution the accused. Mr Carr was then soon after arrested for offensive language because of the continuation of this offence, and also for resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer in the execution of their duties. The main issue in this matter was whether or not the arrest was lawful, and if so, was it improper. It is important to note that this case was decided before the provisions of LEPRA was passed by the parliament and became valid law meaning the Court had to rely on common law principles to determine its outcome. The arrest for vulgar language in this case was held to be proper because the officer had reasonable suspicion (having witnessed him swearing and

When the Supreme Court must analyze an agency's interpretation of statutes, the Court applies the two-step

The Missouri Supreme Court has interpreted “highway” to apply to any roads where the public is accustomed to travel. Covert, S.W.3d at 75. The Missouri courts will look at the following factors to determine if a road is a highway: its (1) accessibility by (a) emergency vehicles, (b) delivery vehicles, and (c) members of the public; (2) its regulation, Id. at 74,75; (3) maintenance of the road, and (4) its usage for travel and as a thoroughfare, State v. Gittemeier, 400 S.W.3d 838, 844 (Mo. Ct. App. E.D. 2013). Furthermore, the courts have determined that a privately maintained road may still be considered a highway if it is still accessible to the public. Covert, S.W.3d at 77.

1. When interpreting legislation, the Courts use several approaches to aid their interpretation. Describe how the literal, golden and mischief rules of interpretation operate.

(b) R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p Factortame Ltd (No.1) [1990] AC 85 and (No.2) [1991] 1 AC 603

There are ways for the courts to prevent things such as trivial matters in courts through proper interpretation. There are two ways courts can interpret matters, there is the textual and contextual approach. In this situation, the approach would be more contextual as it would focus on the use of reason to interpret the law beyond what is in the statute and more based on societal factors.8 Societal factors refer to a person’s economic, financial, educational, or a person’s background. Some people in society have a low standing in all these factors, which would put them at a disadvantage and most laws reflect those needs.

What happens in the state legislation greatly impacts everyone throughout the state. The majority of it is from the funding that they provide to different entities. One of the major things that they provide funding to and have control of it schools. One of the major players in this is the University of Minnesota. Legislature has a tremendous amount of responsibility for making things happen and making things better and safer for people. They can sometimes also have issues of their own that they have to solve in order to do things effectively. The things that they put into place effect everyone in some way whether that is big or not depends on what you do and what it is that they changed.

The different roles of the branches are The Judicial branch was created to interpret the laws. When something is ambiguous or unclear the courts are supposed to decide how to act on that law.When first created, the executive branch was supposed to execute/enforce the laws and will of Congress.The executive branch is the president. Who has the power to create new government agencies, veto bills from the

The statute that the Court have to interpret is whether they should consider the blood test.

Statutory law Statutory laws is laws in which the government enforce. All the laws were written and set by the Government. If anyone is caught breaking any of these laws, then the police are obligated to arrest you and to be prosecuted in the correct way. An example of this is the new smoking ban in cars, the Government set out a new law starting from the 1st of October 2015 which states that anyone caught smoking in a car with someone else in the car who is under the age of 18 will be breaking the law, and you can get arrested for it. Another example of statutory law is speed limits, The government set outs all the speed limits to protect drivers and pedestrians.

The workforce has developed rapidly over the years in relation to policy and statutory frameworks, with an emphasis upon the national curriculum in relation to literacy. The frameworks is influenced by political aspects by theoretical and political aspects. This has been reflected within practice as policy brings change and implications for practitioners and managers. Research has gone a long way to implement the revised national curriculum which was due to the concerns raised due to the fact as a country we are falling behind on the national league tables as we are in position 23 (DfEE, 2013), which is quite disappointing as English is our first language within Britain, and we have made no improvements within the last three years (DfEE, 2013).

On the one hand it is evident that terms implied at common law can be ‘implied in law’ or ‘implied in fact’. Terms implied as a matter of fact are said to give effect to unexpressed intentions of the

Statutory interpretation is required where complication and ambiguity arises as to what the section actually provides and to whom is within the provisions. There are numerous occurrences where judges call for statues to be interpreted further in more depth; such as failure of legislation to cover a point, a broad term, drafting

Illogical distinctions. The use of distinguishing to avoid past decisions can lead to ‘hair-splitting’ resulting in some areas of the law becoming very complex. From 1898 to 1966 the House of Lords was completely bound by its own past decisions unless the decision had been made per incuriam, that is, in

in criminal law and Beckett Ltd v. Lyons [1967] 1 All ER 833 the law