1) Introduction

In the common law system, judges play a vital role in delivering justice by interpreting the mentioned statutes and laws, giving them a higher position in the legal system. But with this high position comes a lot of responsibilities as a particular statute can be interpreted in several ways depending on the case, its situation, the impact its judgment will have on society as a whole, and what role it will play if it's taken as a precedent in the future cases. Unlike the civil law system, where the judges abide by the literal rule of interpretation, common law judges must think a lot before giving a judgment. Let's understand these rules in detail.

2) Types of rules present

a) Literal Rule -it is the most important rule out of the four rules and is also considered the first rule applied. It takes the plain, literal meaning of words mentioned in the law or the statute mentioned by the draftsmen.

b) Golden Rule this rule unlike the literal rule, which only focuses on the stated statute, takes the whole of the statute together, placing the word or section in its context and giving the words their ordinary meaning unless this produces an absurdity or inconsistency, in which case the judge must try to give the words some other contextual meaning.

c) Purposive Rule this rule tries to ascertain what the draftsman intended by the words by examining the general purpose of the section and the social, economic, or political context.

d) Mischief Rule this rule directs the judges to look to the previous common law and the history of the Act to see what was wrong with the law, and what was the mischief that the draftsmen sought to remedy. This rule came into the limelight through the Heydon case where 4 things were brought up which should be kept in mind while interpreting the statute. They are

What was the common law before the statute was enacted

What was the mischief and mistake the common law did not offer for

What solution has been resolved and approved by Parliament to treat the Commonwealth disease

What is the genuine purpose of the remedy

3) Why is the golden rule used

Salmond in The essence of the Law says Lies in its spirit, nor its letter, for the letter, is significant only as being the external manifestation of the intention that underlies it. Nevertheless, in all ordinary cases, the courts must be content to accept the litera legis as the exclusive and conclusive evidence of the sententia legis. They must, in general, take it absolutely for granted that the legislature has said what it meant, and meant what it has said. [1] The golden rule allows the judges to opt for the most sensible and appropriate interpretation of the statute rather than just simply implying the written statute. Propounded in the case of Grey v. Pearson [2] by lord Wensleydale, its a modification of the literate rule, taking into account the context in which the statute is formed by the legislators to impart justice. It can be applied in a narrow or broad approach, where the prior is taken when the statute is capable of multiple interpretations and later when there is only one possible interpretation of the statute.

A) Narrow Approach multiple interpretations of a single statute. Through this approach, judges can interpret the most clear and accurate meaning of the statute to showcase its true existence.

B) Broad Approach - only one solid interpretation of the statute. This approach allows the judges to clear out all the absurdity that the statute might be providing by looking at the broader context of the statute.

4) Cases where the Golden Rule was applied

The meaning of the statute "a driver causing accident shall stop after the accident" as found in section 77(1) of the Road Traffic Act [3], was contested in the case of Lee v. Knapp [4]. In this instance, the driver of the car caused an accident, stopped for a short while, and then fled. Using the golden rule, the court determined that the driver had not complied with the section's requirements because he had failed to stop for long enough to allow interested parties to ask him pertinent questions about the collision at the scene but in the context of the present case, this Act creates ambiguity allowing the culprit to escape. Therefore, the court later applies the golden rule to deliver justice.

Using the golden rule of interpretation, the Supreme Court established in Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar [5] that the date the trial court pronounces the sentence, not the date of the offense, is when the offender's age must be ascertained.

The respondent in State of Punjab v. Qaiser Jehan Begum [6] applied Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, requesting a referral to the civil court within six months of learning of the compensation award, even though the section specifies that the reference must be made within six months of the award date. The Supreme Court ruled that the application was filed on time and that no reference, if any, could be made against the award until an award of compensation is actually or constructively known. Because of this, it was necessary for justice and fair play that the statute of limitations be counted.

5) Advantages of the Golden Rule

When the literal meaning of the statute is ambiguous or vague, we can go for this approach.

The Golden Rule allows the judges to interpret the statute in a broader context allowing them to use a particular statute in a different context.

Reduces multiple amendments and minute changes of the statutes.

6) Disadvantages of the Golden Rule

As it allows the judges to interpret the law according to the given case, it may cause a disbalance of power and judicial overreach.

Usually, the statutes are so detailed and well-written that the application of this rule is quite limited.

7) Conclusion

Every nation has its judicial system, the purpose of which is to grant justice to all. The court aims to interpret the law in such a manner that every citizen is ensured justice to all. To ensure justice to all the concept of canons of interpretation was expounded. These are the rules which are evolved for determining the real intention of the legislature. But the words used in a statute don't need to be always clear, explicit, and unambiguous, and thus, in such cases courts need to determine a clear and explicit meaning of the words or phrases used by the legislature and at the same time remove all the doubts if any. In such cases, the golden rule helps the judges to reach to a fair conclusion.

8) Citations

1) Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Golden Rule, available at: https://iep.utm.edu/goldrule/ (last visited on December 14, 2023).

2) Grey v. Pearson 1857.

3) Road Traffic Act,1960, s.77(1).

4) Lee v. Knapp 1967.

5) Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar 2003, P.H. 135.

6) State of Punjab v. Qaiser Jehan Begum 1963, SC 1604.