Lecture one : Introduction to interpretation of the laws

• Learning objectives:
• By the end of this lesson, a trainee will be able to;
Interpretation of the laws.
Understand the context of rule
Understand the various rules
 1.0 Introduction to Interpretation of laws

The words of an Act are authoritative because:

They are passed though the law-making procedures.
Interpretation of the law has to follow various rules and principles.
 1.1 The context rule

The meaning of a law phrase may be contained in:

 `its context as suggested by common sense.
 `the definition section which assigns special meaning to some of the statute
terms.
 1.1 The context rule examples

 ‘Arbitrator’ means an arbitrator appointed under section 19 of the Labour

Institutions Act, 2004.
 `Arbitration
Definition
A process in which a disagreement between two or more parties is resolved by
impartial individuals, called arbitrators, in order to avoid costly and lengthy
litigation.
 1.2 The interpretation of the terms
Arbitrator
Definition
 A private, neutral person chosen to arbitrate a disagreement, as opposed to a
court of law.
 An arbitrator could be used to settle any non-criminal dispute, and many
business contracts make provisions for an arbitrator in the event of a
disagreement.
 Generally, resolving a disagreement through an arbitrator is substantially less
expensive than resolving it through a court of law
 1.2 The interpretation of the terms cont…
Mediator
Definition
 A person who tries to end a disagreement helping by the two sides to talk about
and agree on a solution.
 A person whose job is to mediate in a disagreement (talk to the people or groups
involved to help them find a solution).

Mediation
 Is an alternative dispute resolution method with a neutral person helping the
parties find a solution to their dispute.
 The neutral party is known as a mediator.
 Mediation may also be called case evaluation or facilitated negotiation
 1.2 The interpretation of the terms cont...
Comparison Between Arbitration & Mediation
Arbitration Mediation
Adjudication Expedited negotiation
Arbitrators control the outcome. Parties control the outcome.
Arbitrator is given power to decide. Mediator has no power to decide.
Final and binding decision. Settlement only with party approval.
Often extensive discovery is required. Exchange of information is voluntary and is
often limited. Parties exchange information that
will assist in reaching a resolution.
Arbitrator listens to facts and evidence Mediator helps the parties define and understand
and renders an award. the issues and each side's interests.
 1.2 The interpretation of the terms cont...
Comparison Between Arbitration & Mediation
Arbitration Mediation
Parties present case, testify under oath. Parties vent feelings, tell story, engage in
creative problem-solving.
Process is formal. Attorneys control party Process is informal.
participation. Parties are active participants.
Evidentiary hearings. Joint and private meetings between individual
No private communication with the arbitrator. parties and their counsel.
Decision based on facts, evidence, and law. Outcome based on needs of parties.
Result is win/lose award—Relationships are often Result is mutually satisfactory—A
lost. relationship may be maintained or created.
More expensive than mediation, but less expensive Low cost.
than traditional litigation.
Private (but decisions are publicly available). Private and confidential.
 1.2 The interpretation cont…

Child
‘child’ means a person under the age of 14 years, provided that for the employment
in hazardous sector, child means a person under the age of 18 years.
 1.3 The interpretation in the light of policy

The fringe meaning;

When interpreting statutes,
 `Courts of law tend to discover the intention of the legislature.
 `If a court finds it hard to do so, it finds out a meaning which the legislature
would have given in the light of this situation. This is ‘fringe’ meaning.
 1.4 The ‘mischief rule’
 The task of interpreting statute gives judges the chance of expressing their own
opinions. This situation encourages the judges to refer to the common law.
 They find out how the legal position was before the respective Act.
 1.5 The literal rule

When words of a statute clearly govern the situation before the court;
 `The judges must apply the words with nothing added or removed.
 `The court can neither extend the statute to a case not within its terms nor curtail
it by leaving a case that the statute literary includes.
 1.6 The interpretation to avoid the absurdity
The Golden rule
 `Judges can construe a statute in such a way as to produce a reasonable result.
 `The construed rule to avoid absurdity is sometimes called the ‘golden rule’.
This applies only in three types of cases.
 The sensible meaning and absurd meaning both are linguistically possible.
 The golden rule does not contradict the literal rule.
 Judges are correcting a statute. Very strong reasons to include the court to
meddle with a statute.
 1.7 Presumptions
 Presumptions are instances when the duty of the judges goes beyond automatic
enforcement of the dictates of Parliament. The judges’ function is also to do
justice in accordance with settled principles of law in a free society;
 The most controversial presumptions are those enshrine the values of a capitalist
society. E.g.
 the presumption against interference with vested rights,
 the presumption against the taking of property without compensation, and
 the presumption against interference with contract.