This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- fisher v bell
- Statutory interpretation
- OCR A Level Law 2024 Predictions
- Statutory, voluntary, private, informal, social provisions
- OCR A-LEVEL LAW - which topics could come up as essay questions?
- Where to get signatory for penalty charge
- AS Level Law paper 1 OCR
- Pregnant at ECT year
- Do I change my name?
- Social work and social care services
- BTEC H&S Care Unit 12: Supporting Individuals with Additional Needs Work Explained
- How do I become an estranged student?
- Case Help
- Examples of unjust laws in the UK
- Migrant worker- Maternity leave
- Annual Leave Job Description
- Student finance and maintenance loan
- How to change student finance application?
- HELP! New F1 & pregnant- how does the maternity pay work please?
- counselling services
i need help with statutory interpretation
hi guys, sorry to keep bothering you, however i am really stuck with the below assignment and do not have a clue on how to start it.
The United Kingdom has been concerned at the amount of fatal injuries that have recently happened because of people not wearing safety helmets when riding bikes. In 1995 the United Kingdom became a signatory to the People Safety Treaty (fictitious). Parliament has recently passed the People Safety Act 2009 (fictitious) so that the People Safety Treaty (fictitious) has become legally binding. Section 1(1) of the Act states:
It shall be an offence to fail to wear a safety helmet whilst in control of a bicycle, skateboard or other such vehicle
Consider this provision with regards to:
Tom, who was delivering a bicycle to a bike shop. He was carrying the bike and the police arrested him. He was convicted and appeals.
Dick was riding a bike but had a safety hat (from a construction site) on. He, like Tom, was arrested and convicted and also appeals.
Harriet had just bought a new hover board, which floats on the air and does not have wheels. These were not available for purchase before the Act was passed. She was not wearing a safety helmet and was convicted. She also wants to appeal the decision.
Counsel for the appellants wishes to cite a Canadian Supreme Court case (fictitious) that defines what type of headgear that can be classed as a safety helmet. They also wish to cite the American Civil Safety Code (fictitious) which provides a comprehensive list of safety helmets. There is also a recent Australian negligence case (fictitious) that states that a hover board is not the same as a bike because it is mechanically propelled.
Discuss the rules and other aids used in statutory interpretation which the judges, in the Court of Appeal, could use to help them arrive at a decision in each of the appeals.
Your answer should be written concisely and must not exceed 1500 words . You should include an accurate word count at the end of the assignment.
please help thank u in advance
The United Kingdom has been concerned at the amount of fatal injuries that have recently happened because of people not wearing safety helmets when riding bikes. In 1995 the United Kingdom became a signatory to the People Safety Treaty (fictitious). Parliament has recently passed the People Safety Act 2009 (fictitious) so that the People Safety Treaty (fictitious) has become legally binding. Section 1(1) of the Act states:
It shall be an offence to fail to wear a safety helmet whilst in control of a bicycle, skateboard or other such vehicle
Consider this provision with regards to:
Tom, who was delivering a bicycle to a bike shop. He was carrying the bike and the police arrested him. He was convicted and appeals.
Dick was riding a bike but had a safety hat (from a construction site) on. He, like Tom, was arrested and convicted and also appeals.
Harriet had just bought a new hover board, which floats on the air and does not have wheels. These were not available for purchase before the Act was passed. She was not wearing a safety helmet and was convicted. She also wants to appeal the decision.
Counsel for the appellants wishes to cite a Canadian Supreme Court case (fictitious) that defines what type of headgear that can be classed as a safety helmet. They also wish to cite the American Civil Safety Code (fictitious) which provides a comprehensive list of safety helmets. There is also a recent Australian negligence case (fictitious) that states that a hover board is not the same as a bike because it is mechanically propelled.
Discuss the rules and other aids used in statutory interpretation which the judges, in the Court of Appeal, could use to help them arrive at a decision in each of the appeals.
Your answer should be written concisely and must not exceed 1500 words . You should include an accurate word count at the end of the assignment.
please help thank u in advance
Tom was in control of the bike, so no appeal for him.
Dick's appeal rests on the definition of helmet/hat when the act was passed. Does a hard hat count as a helmet? Try the mischief rule, mention Heydon's case.
Harriet's case comes under ejusdem generis, because 'other such vehicle' when taken in context of 'bike, skateboard' means something like those two, and a hoverboard sounds similar to a skateboard. Ask Marty, he'll know about it, Doc Brown too.
Basically you want to run through all the rules of interpretation, so the 3 Latin rules, the Literal, Mischief, Purposive, and Golden Rules, and then the intrinsic and extrinsic aids. You'll have to find out whether these foreign findings can be used in the courts. Then solve the 3 problems.
Dick's appeal rests on the definition of helmet/hat when the act was passed. Does a hard hat count as a helmet? Try the mischief rule, mention Heydon's case.
Harriet's case comes under ejusdem generis, because 'other such vehicle' when taken in context of 'bike, skateboard' means something like those two, and a hoverboard sounds similar to a skateboard. Ask Marty, he'll know about it, Doc Brown too.
Basically you want to run through all the rules of interpretation, so the 3 Latin rules, the Literal, Mischief, Purposive, and Golden Rules, and then the intrinsic and extrinsic aids. You'll have to find out whether these foreign findings can be used in the courts. Then solve the 3 problems.
thank you very much for that
micky022
Tom was in control of the bike, so no appeal for him.
Dick's appeal rests on the definition of helmet/hat when the act was passed. Does a hard hat count as a helmet? Try the mischief rule, mention Heydon's case.
Harriet's case comes under ejusdem generis, because 'other such vehicle' when taken in context of 'bike, skateboard' means something like those two, and a hoverboard sounds similar to a skateboard. Ask Marty, he'll know about it, Doc Brown too.
Basically you want to run through all the rules of interpretation, so the 3 Latin rules, the Literal, Mischief, Purposive, and Golden Rules, and then the intrinsic and extrinsic aids. You'll have to find out whether these foreign findings can be used in the courts. Then solve the 3 problems.
Dick's appeal rests on the definition of helmet/hat when the act was passed. Does a hard hat count as a helmet? Try the mischief rule, mention Heydon's case.
Harriet's case comes under ejusdem generis, because 'other such vehicle' when taken in context of 'bike, skateboard' means something like those two, and a hoverboard sounds similar to a skateboard. Ask Marty, he'll know about it, Doc Brown too.
Basically you want to run through all the rules of interpretation, so the 3 Latin rules, the Literal, Mischief, Purposive, and Golden Rules, and then the intrinsic and extrinsic aids. You'll have to find out whether these foreign findings can be used in the courts. Then solve the 3 problems.
Fair points but I'd strongly disagree with your suggest that; 'Tom was in control of the bike, so no appeal for him.'
It would be absurd that if you were to deliver a bike by way of carrying it, than the legislation should be binding on you to wear a helmet whilst carrying it. You would have to look at what the Act was invented for.
Was it invented to enforce people to wear helmets whilst carrying a bike to be delivered. Or was it invented to cut down the number of deaths caused by people falling off of bikes, and not wearing sufficient headgear to protect them.
ryan harding
Fair points but I'd strongly disagree with your suggest that; 'Tom was in control of the bike, so no appeal for him.'
It would be absurd that if you were to deliver a bike by way of carrying it, than the legislation should be binding on you to wear a helmet whilst carrying it. You would have to look at what the Act was invented for.
Was it invented to enforce people to wear helmets whilst carrying a bike to be delivered. Or was it invented to cut down the number of deaths caused by people falling off of bikes, and not wearing sufficient headgear to protect them.
It would be absurd that if you were to deliver a bike by way of carrying it, than the legislation should be binding on you to wear a helmet whilst carrying it. You would have to look at what the Act was invented for.
Was it invented to enforce people to wear helmets whilst carrying a bike to be delivered. Or was it invented to cut down the number of deaths caused by people falling off of bikes, and not wearing sufficient headgear to protect them.
True, she'll have to show that the Literal and Mischief/Purposive rules all give different outcomes.
micky022
True, she'll have to show that the Literal and Mischief/Purposive rules all give different outcomes.
Urhuh. That's how I would approach it if it were me. As important as it is to state which out come would be best, I would go through various rules applied and the various outcomes resulting by this. Then propose which you think is more suitable/likely to be used and why.
Related discussions
- fisher v bell
- Statutory interpretation
- OCR A Level Law 2024 Predictions
- Statutory, voluntary, private, informal, social provisions
- OCR A-LEVEL LAW - which topics could come up as essay questions?
- Where to get signatory for penalty charge
- AS Level Law paper 1 OCR
- Pregnant at ECT year
- Do I change my name?
- Social work and social care services
- BTEC H&S Care Unit 12: Supporting Individuals with Additional Needs Work Explained
- How do I become an estranged student?
- Case Help
- Examples of unjust laws in the UK
- Migrant worker- Maternity leave
- Annual Leave Job Description
- Student finance and maintenance loan
- How to change student finance application?
- HELP! New F1 & pregnant- how does the maternity pay work please?
- counselling services
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
OCR A-level Law Paper 3 (H418/03) - 12th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
