AIYUSHI SAHANI

ALL THE BEST GUYS!

THANK ME LATER

WHAT ARE THE RULES OF INTERPRETATION?

Almost all jurists and scholars resist the notion that they are “law.” Instead, most contend that
those tools, often called “canons” of interpretation, a legal category that seems to sit in between
law and individual judicial philosophy. Process by which courts seek to ascertain the meaning of
the legislature through medium of the authoritative form in which it is expressed. Interpretation
is to find out the meaning of the words.

Salmond, interpretation is the process by which the courts reach to ascertain the meaning of the
legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed. Justice Grey
described it as ―the process by which a judge construes from the words of a statute book the
meaning of which he either believes to be that of the legislature, or which he proposes to
attribute to it .Statutory interpretation is the process of interpreting and applying legislation to
decide cases. Interpretation is necessary when case involves ambiguity. Generally, the words of
a statute have a plain and straightforward meaning. But in some cases, there may be ambiguity
or vagueness in the words of the statute that must be resolved.

Keshavji Raviji & Co. v. CIT 1990(2) SCC 231

The rules of interpretation are not rules of Law. They are mere aids to construction and
constitute some broad pointers. It is the task of the court to decide which one, in the light to all
relevant circumstances, ought to prevail.

INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATION

Most important thing while interpreting any statute is to find the intention of the legislature who
has framed the said statute. It is only after knowing the intention of the legislature from the
words of the Statute, effect can be given to it. Every word, phrase or sentence in the Act is to be
construed in light of the general purpose of the Act itself. Statute must be read as a whole and in
context. Context must be identified before actually interpreting any provision. Statute must be
construed to make it effective and workable. There is always a presumption of constitutionality
of any statute when its validity is challenged. If meaning of any provision is plain, clear and
unambiguous, effect must be given to it.

FRANSIS BENNION

A principle of statutory interpretation embodies the policy of the law, which is in turn is based on
public policy. The court presumes, unless the contrary intention appears, that the legislator
intended to conform to this legal policy. A principle of statutory interpretation can therefore be
described as a principle of legal policy formulated as a guide to legislative intention
Interpretation is of two kinds – grammatical and logical. Grammatical interpretation is arrived at
by reference to the laws of speech to the words used in the statute; in other words, it regards only
the verbal expression of the legislature. Logical interpretation gives effect to the intention of the
legislature by taking into account other circumstances permissible according to the rules settled
in this behalf. According to Gray, grammatical interpretation is the application to a statute of the
laws of speech; Logical interpretation calls for the comparison of the statute with other statutes
and with the whole system of law, and for the consideration of the time and circumstances in
which the statute was passed.

Michael Zander gives three reasons why statutory interpretation is necessary:

 Complexity of statutes in regards to the nature of the subject, numerous draftsmen and the
blend of legal and technical language can result in incoherence, vague and ambiguous
language.
 Anticipation of future events leads to the use of indeterminate terms. The impossible task
of anticipating every possible scenario also leads to the use of indeterminate language.
Judges therefore have to interpret statutes because of the gaps in law.

BASIC PRINCIPLES

A. Presumptions

i. Constitutionality of a statute

ii. Words implying presumption: ‘shall’ or ‘may’

B. Mandatory v. Directory

C. Liberal v. Strict

D. Penal v. Remedial statutes

E. Cannons of interpretation

1. Literal rule: The First Principle

2. Golden rule

3. Mischief: Heydon’s rule

4. Purposivistic interpretation

The task of statutory interpretation has been a matter of considerable judicial debate in almost all
over English speaking world. The court had not stick to any particular cannon of interpretation.
In certain judgments more than one rule of interpretation had been beneficially applied to arrive
at the proper meaning.
JUSTICE HOLMES IN TOWNE V. EISNER

‘A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may
vary greatly in colour and content according to the circumstances and the time in which it is
used. The court has emphasised that while interpreting the statutes ‘awareness of the social
perspective’ and Directive Principles embodied in constitution of India should be used as the
guiding factor.

In various countries there are separate statutes on interpretation. This brings clarity and certainty
to a considerable extent. Various enactments like Interpretation Act 1901 of Australia,

 The Interpretation Act 1978 of the United Kingdom,

 Interpretation Act 1985 of Canada,
 Interpretation Act 1987 of New South Wales
 Interpretation Act 2005 for Republic of Ireland

In the process of interpretation, several aids are used. They may be statutory or non- statutory.
Statutory aids may be illustrated by the General Clauses Act, 1897 and by specific definitions
contained in individuals Acts whereas non-statutory aids is illustrated by common law rules of
interpretation (including certain presumptions relating to interpretation) and also by case-laws
relating to the interpretation of statutes.

SEAFORD COURT ESTATES LTD. VS ASHER

Lord Denning

“English Knowledge is not an instrument of mathematical precision… It would certainly save

the judges from the trouble if the acts of parliament were drafted with divine precision and
perfect clarity. In the absence of it, when a defect appears, a judge cannot simply fold hand and
blame the draftsman.

OBSERVATION OF DENNING L.J. IN SEAFORD COURT ESTATES LTD. V. ASHER,

(1949) 2 K.B. 481 (498),

“It is not within human powers to forsee the manifold sets of facts which may arise; and that;
even if it were, it is not possible to provide for them in terms free from all ambiguity. The
English language is not an instrument of mathematical precision. Our literature would be much
the poorer if it were. This is where the draftsmen of Acts of Parliament have often been unfairly
criticised. A judge, believing himself to be fettered by the supposed rule that he must look to the
language and nothing else, laments that the draftsmen have not provided for this or that, or have
been guilty of some or other ambiguity.

Interpretation of Statutes is required for two basic reasons viz. to ascertain:

Legislative Language - Legislative language may be complicated for a layman, and hence
may require interpretation; and

Legislative Intent - The intention of legislature or Legislative intent assimilates two

aspects:

 the concept of ‘meaning’, i.e., what the word means; and

 the concept of ‘purpose’ and ‘object’ or the ‘reason’ or ‘spirit’ pervading through the
statute.

POINTS IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERPRETING STATUTES

 Statute must be read as a whole in Context

 Statute should be Construed so as to make it Effective and Workable
 The process of construction combines both the literal and purposive approaches.

PRESUMPTIONS IN STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

Presumptions represent the accepted judicial view of a range of circumstances that have been
predetermined to be the way in which every manifestation of those circumstances will be
viewed, until any evidence to the contrary is produced. These tend to arise from theoretical and
practical principles of the Law.

RULES OF INTERPRETAION

 Rule of Literal Interpretation

 Golden Rule of Interpretation
 The Mischief Rule
 Rule of Reasonable Construction
 Rule of Harmonious Construction
 Rule of Beneficial Construction
 Rule of Ejusdem Generis

INTERNAL AIDS TO INTERPRETAION

 Title : Long title, Short Title

 Preamble
  Headings and Title of a Chapter
 Marginal Notes
 Definitional Sections/ Clauses
 Illustrations
 Proviso
 Explanations
 Schedules
 Punctuation

EXTERNAL AIDS TO INTERPRETAION

 Parliamentary History, Historical Facts and Surrounding Circumstances

 Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions
 Dictionaries
 Judicial Decisions

FUNDAMENTAL RULE OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

Fundamental rule of statutory interpretation requires that judges should examine the difficult
words or provisions in their context—in the statute as a whole .

ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE STATUTE

The main factors to which a judge looks are the language used, the scheme of the Act and the
purpose the Act is designed to achieve .

How Judges deal with the Problem of Statutory Interpretation

Presumptions

A judge begins by assuming certain things. These will be taken to be true unless a good
argument is given to demonstrate that the presumption should not apply. These presumptions are:
That the law has not been changed – unless the act shows a clear intention to change it; That
mens rea is required in criminal cases; That parliament has not changed the law ‘retrospectively’
that the statute does not affect past acts, to make illegal something that was legal at the time it
was done.

COMMENCEMENT, REPEAL AND REVIVAL OF STATUTES

Commencement.Commencement of an act means the period of time in which an

act comes into operation. Generally act refers to “Short Title, and the extent of an
act.
 MODES OF COMMUNICATION

 Act shall come into force at once.

 Act shall come into force, when it is published in the official gazette wherein the date of
commencement of an act is specified.

 In case if the date of commencement of an act is not published in the official gazette then
there are certain rules that are recognized by the courts so as to ascertain the dates on
which a particular act comes into force.

 Sec.5 of the General Clauses Act states “When any central Act is not expressed to come
into operation on a particular day then it shall come into operation on a day on which it
receives it assent.

 (i) In the case of the Central Act made before the commencement of the constitution the
Governor General.

 (ii) In the case of an Act of the parliament of the President.

 This rule also governs the cases where the commencement of the Act is stated in the Act
then the act shall come into force at once.

TIME LIMIT FOR AN ACT TO COME INTO EXISTENCE

Whether is there any exact time for which an act has to come into force! Sec.5(3) of General
Clauses Act says that “An act could come into force on the midnight of the previous day.
EXTENT OF APPLICABILITY OF AN ACT
Extent means the territories to which the act applies. A Central Act would be applicable to whole
of India and State Act would be applicable to whole of the State. The Act while referring to the
date of commencement would also express as to the extent of applicability sometimes it may
exempt any particular state (For Eg. Jammu & Kashmir).
REPEAL
Repeal is a process by which legislature takes away certain provisions of an enactment expressly
are by implication if found inconsistent with the other provisions of the statute. The object of an
act is to excise dead matter prune off superfluities and reject the clearly inconsistent enactment
and doesn’t create any fresh liabilities. When an enactment is repealed by the legislature no fresh
proceedings can be taken under it, but repeal would not affect the vested rights or would not
affect matters already concluded before the repeal.
SECTION 6
Where any Central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act repeals any
enactment by which the text of any central act or regulation was amended by the express
omission, insertion or substitution of any matter, then unless a different intention appears the
repeal shall not affect the continuance of any such amendment made by the enactment to
repealed and in operation at the time of such an repeal”
The regulations made, repeals any enactment made or hereinafter to be made then unless a
different intention appears the repeal shall not -
(i) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which the repeal takes effect; or
(ii) affects the previous operation of any enactment so repealed or anything duty done or suffered
there under or
iii) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired occurred or incurred under any
enactment so repealed or
(iv) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed
against any enactment so repealed.
(v) affect any investigation legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right privilege
obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid and any such investigation,
legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and such penalty, forfeiture
or punishment may be imposed if the repealing Act or Regulation Act has not been passed.
Thus whenever repeal to be made then all the provisions of Sec.6 of the General Clauses Act
would follow.

REVIVAL
When the repealing provision in an act is repealed by another it does not revive the original
enactment unless such revival is expressly stated in the new repealing act.
“In any central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act it shall be necessary
for the purpose of reviving either wholly or partially, an enactment wholly or partially repealed
expressly to state that purpose.

DO JUDGES MAKELAW?
Montesquieu classified the functions of governance in a democratic set up into the legislature,
executive and judiciary. one of the chief purpose of interpretation is judicial legislation because
litigants go to court with the demand to fill in the gaps in law.
It is very often observed that judiciary should not legislate and it legislates under the guise of
interpretation. Judiciary has only to fill in the gaps in legislative commands of the statutes.
Parliamentary sovereignty was established in Britain during the same Stuart period when the
British Parliament abolished monarchy through an Act and declared Britain to be a
‘Commonwealth’ or ‘Republic’ in 1649. With monarchy coming to an end, the maxim, “The
King can do no wrong” became ‘The Parliament can do no wrong.’
DO JUDGES MAKE LAW
• It was argued by many commentators that a judge simply declares,
▫ Discovers, and
▫ Applies the existing body of legal principles by a logical and a purely mechanical
process.
There are certain gaps in a statute which the judiciary is expected to fill up by way of
interpretation. This is popularly known as Judicial Legislation.Such filling up is to be done in
consonance and conformity with the constitutional dictates and confined to the extent permitted
by the Constitution. Theory of positive jurisprudence laid down that law making is the task, of
the legislature, not the Judge. The Judges’ task was only to adjudicate disputes between the
parties on the basis of the law made by the legislature. Positivist jurisprudence proceeded on the
assumption that the legal order was ‘gapless’.
According to the analytical school of Austin, Parliament, and not judges make law. Roscoe
Pound, propounded his “instrumentalist” approach, which would allow the judge a greater
flexibility. The Blackstonian doctrine as the ‘declaratory’ function of the courts, holding that the
duty of the court is not to pronounce a new law but to maintain and expound the old one.

SIR FRANCIS BACON

Judges ought to remember that their office is jus dicere and not jus dare , to inrepret the Law, and
not to make Law, or give Law. Else it will be like the authority claimed by church of
Rome ,which under pretext of exposition of scripture doth not stick to add and alter; and to
pronounce that which they do not find; and by shew of anitquity to introduce novelty. According
to Hans Kelsen all judges, trial as well as appellate, created individual specific norms by their
decisions.
The process of concretization of general and abstract norms always results in creation of new
law, individuated and specific norms. In this sense, the distinction between norm creation and
norm application is not an absolute but a relative distinction.
ADJUDICATION VIS-A-VIS LEGISLATION
Whether interpretation necessarily involves Legislation. Judicial decision is however not akin to
lawmaking; it is rather an alternative available whenever the applicable precepts provide more
than the choices. In justification of this, one needs to understand the fundamental differences
between legislation‘ and adjudication.
Justice Holmes Said:
I recognize without hesitation that judges must and do legislate, but they do so only interstitially
they are confined from molar to molecular motions.
Therefore, the general framework provided by the statute is to be filled in each case by means of
interpretation following principles of interpretation of the statute.