Where the meaning of words in a statute, if strictly applied,
would lead to an absurdity, the golden rule is that the courts
are entitled to assume that Parliament did not intend such
absurdity, and they will construe the Act to give it the meaning
which Parliament intended.
So, for example, the Offences Against the Person Act 1861
provided that ‘whosoever being married shall marry another
person during the life of the former husband
or wife’ is guilty of bigamy.
Interpreted literally, this definition is absurd on two counts.
First, the phrase ‘shall marry another person’
is meaningless in the context, as the essence of bigamy is
that a married person cannot marry again while his first marriage
subsists.
Secondly, the reference to a ‘former’ husband
or wife is quite inappropriate.
The word ‘former’ suggests that the original marriage
no longer exists, but if that were the case the person marrying
again would not be guilty of bigamy.
Despite the slipshod draftsmanship of the Act, however, the
intention was clear, and the courts have interpreted the relevant
section as meaning that a person who purports to marry another
while his or wife or husband is still alive is guilty of bigamy.
See also:
Interpretation
of the Law: 'Literal Rule'
Interpretation
of the Law: 'Mischief Rule'
Statutory
Interpretation
Terminology:
Civil and Magistrates Courts
Terminology:
County Court
|
|
SOLICITORS
ENGLAND & WALES
INDEX
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
An A-Z of solicitors based in England and Wales, dealing with
all matters of law
SOLICITORS SCOTLAND
An A-Z of solicitors based in Scotland, dealing with all matters
of law
INDEX
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
ACCIDENT
AND PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS ONLINE DIRECTORY
INDEX
A
B-C
D-G
H-M
N-R
S-W
|
 |
