how the method works in devising and writing an answer to a problem
question.
In this worked example for reasons of convenience and circumstances the
answer is more confined than it might be in real life. First, the arguments
canvassed on questions of interpretation are based on interpreting the section
of a hypothetical Act on which the problem is based by reference to its
original policy. Policy is derived from two sources –
common sense
inferences about the purpose of the legislation and the maxims of statutory
interpretation. Obviously if this was a real case with a real statute done in the
real world the arguments would included any permissible direct sources of
policy, inference from the overall terms of the statute and precedent. That said,
a restricted approach is adopted here for practical reasons but it is enough to
achieve our purpose, namely to demonstrate how the overall method works.
Second, as has been discussed, there are other approaches to statutory
interpretation besides original policy, namely choice by an elected judiciary or
choice by reference to considerations of metademocracy.
751
If these
approaches are required for a problem then it is a simple matter to substitute
one of these methods of interpretation in working out and writing the answer.
Third, in the model for interpretation (as outlined above) the options include
the meanings of the ambiguous provision as well as the effect that each will
cause. However, discussion of options here is confined to identifying just the
meanings of the provision. There are two reasons for not dealing directly with
effects. (i) It makes the demonstration of how to answer a problem question
simple. (ii) Commonly, when a court is interpreting a legal rule it is generally
interested only in the narrow effect of the rule. This focuses on which parties
and which action will fall within or without the rule. It flows directly from the
possible meanings of the provision because each meaning marks out the scope
of a provision.
Question
Law
This question is based on section 14 of the (hypothetical) Motor Traffic Act
1955, which provides as follows:
14 Cancellation of licence
Where a person is convicted before a court of any offence in connection with the driving of a
motorcar may, and the person convicted of the offence holds any licence to drive a motorcar
under this Act, the court may cancel the licence
751
Christopher Enright Legal Reasoning
Reasoning Chapter 22 Social Choice:
Interpreting Law
 |
 |
 |