In the construction (interpretation) of statutes, the principle aim of the court must be to carry out the "Intention of Parliament", and the English courts developed three main rules (plus some minor ones) to assist them in the task. On either interpretation, the Golden Rule has strongly counterintuitive implications in some situations. This rule gives due regards to the consequence arising from the usage of such enactment.
These were: the mischief rule, the literal rule, and the golden rule. Particular words (INTERPRETATION) Penal provisions (INTERPRETATION) Retrospectivity (INTERPRETATION) Schedules to an enactment. 2 App Cas 743. Principles of Interpretation of Statutes 205 process of ascertaining the meaning at an Act of Parliament or of a provision of an Act.'' Re Sigsworth  1 Ch 98 Case summary. In Ramanjaya Singh v Baijnath Singh, the Election tribunal set aside the election of the appellant under s 123(7) of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951 on the grounds that the appellant had employed more persons than prescribed for electioneering purpose. The normal way of interpreting or construing a statute is to seek the intention of legislature. Editor’s Note: The Mischief Rule is a certain rule that judges can apply in statutory interpretation in order to discover Parliament’s intention. The Golden Rule. The Golden Rule was used in the R v Allen case (1872). The courts may then apply a secondary meaning. Golden Rule (INTERPRETATION) Meaning of words. One is the Golden rule, which seeks to apply a reasonable and rational result. A statute is an edict of the legislature. The basic rule is that whatever the intention legislature had while making any provision it has been expressed through words and thus, are to be interpreted according to the rules of grammar. Golden Rule. Where there is a potential absurdity in the use of the literal rule, such as ambiguity, the golden rule can provide an 'escape route'. This interpretation is supreme and is called the golden rule of interpretation. The golden rule is that the words of a statute must prima facie be given their ordinary meaning. It was originated in England in 1854 and was coined by C.J. The third rule of interpretation is as follows: WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE OF SCRIPTURE MAKES COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE; THEREFORE, TAKE EVERY WORD AT ITS PRIMARY, ORDINARY, USUAL, LITERAL MEANING UNLESS THE FACTS OF THE IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, STUDIED IN THE LIGHT OF RELATED PASSAGES AND … Consider the first interpretation. • Principle of Beneficial interpretation –Construction more favourable to the assessee in case of any doubt • The golden rule –Words should be given their ordinary sense unless that would lead to some absurdity or inconsistency with the rest of the instrument. By Subhyanka Rao, RMLNLU. It is known as the golden rule because it solves all the problems of interpretation. The golden rule of statutory interpretation may be applied where an application of the literal rule would lead to an absurdity. THE GOLDEN RULE OF INTERPRETATION. The application of this rule gives the judge more discretion than the literal and the golden rule as it allows him to effectively decide on Parliament’s intent. J. JOINDER OF PARTIES See PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE (Joinder) JUDGE See HIGH COURT (Judge) One of the three basic rules of interpretation, construction is ‘Golden Rule’. If … It is also known as British Rule. The most familiar version of the Golden Rule says, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Moral philosophy has barely taken notice of the golden rule in its own terms despite the rule’s prominence in commonsense ethics.
GOLDEN RULE OF INTERPRETATION. However, if the language so permits, it is open to the Court to give to the statute that meaning which promotes the benignant intent of the legislation. Golden Rule of Interpretation In order to avoid blaming the legislative intent that tend to produce an unreasonable result, the judges are allowed to divert from taking the way of ordinary meaning of any enactment and liberated to adopt some other possible meaning which will avoid such result. R v Allen (1872) LR 1 CCR 367 Case summary. This interpretation is supreme and is called the golden rule of interpretation. If the court applies the Literal rule and there was no decision, they will apply other rules of statutory interpretation. The Golden Rule. The Golden Rule Advantages: The golden rule still respects the words of Parliament (and interprets them in a literal way) except in limited situations. This rule allows a Judge to depart from a statute’s normal meaning to avoid an absurd result.