Define: Statutory Interpretation

Business, Legal & Accounting Glossary

Definition: Statutory Interpretation


Full Definition of Statutory Interpretation

Interpretation of statutes has been an essential part of English law since Heydon’s Case in 1854 and although it can seem complex, the four main rules are easy to learn.

English law is designed to be clear, precise and as unconditional as possible in order that those who are subject to it can know what behaviour is proscribed, and what is permitted. However, it can be difficult to create laws that cater for unforeseen circumstances, so the courts have developed rules on interpretation of statutes in order to fill in the gaps.

Differences Between the Literal Rule and Golden Rule

The most common rule of statute interpretation is the literal rule, derived from the Sussex Peerage Case (1844). According to this rule, the words in a statute must be given their plain, ordinary and literal meaning.

However, the literal rule sometimes causes absurdities; such as in Whiteley v. Chappell (1868), where a defendant was found not guilty of impersonating “any person entitled to vote” because they had impersonated a dead person.

As a result of these problems, the courts developed the golden rule; which was first expressed in the case of Grey v. Pearson (1857). The golden rule states that “the grammatical and ordinary sense of words may be modified so as to avoid [an] absurdity or inconsistency, but no farther.”

The golden rule has two forms: wide and narrow. The wide rule, as demonstrated by the decision in Re Sigsworth [1935] that a son who murdered his mother could not inherit her estate, allows an obnoxious result to be avoided even where the wording of a statute has only one true meaning.

The narrow rule is much more restrictive however and is only used where there is ambiguity or absurdity in the law itself. For example, in v. Allen (1872) the Act outlawing bigamy gave rise to an impossibility. The court, therefore, interpreted the bigamy legislation so as to imply commission if a person underwent the marriage ceremony while already married, rather than having to be married twice at the same time; an impossibility due to the wording of the marriage law.

The Similarity Between the Mischief Rule and Purposive Approach

The oldest rule of statutory interpretation is the mischief rule, also known as the rule in Heydon’s Case (1584). According to this rule, the court examines what the state of the law was before the legislation was passed, in order to determine what problem, or “mischief”, it was supposed to prevent.

It does this by asking four questions:

  1. was the law before the statute was enacted?
  2. What was the mischief or defect not remedied by existing law?
  3. What remedy did Parliament propose?
  4. What is the true reason for the remedy?

As the rule interprets statutes addressing defects in the common law, the mischief rule is now of limited use. In its place is the purposive approach; adopted from the European Court of Justice via the European Communities Act. Here, the courts try to determine the purpose behind a statute, then interpret the wording in light of this. It is, essentially, the mischief rule for modern legislation.

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Aids to Statute Interpretation

In addition to the four main rules of statutory interpretation, the courts will also look at the intrinsic and extrinsic aids available to them.

Extrinsic aids are documents outside of the statute itself, including other statutes and explanatory documents, such as:

  • The Human Rights Act 1998, section 3 of which requires statutes to be interpreted in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, so far as is possible;
  • The Interpretation Act 1978, which gives guidance on what many terms mean; and
  • Hansard, the record of discussions in the House of Commons, following the ruling in Pepper v. Hart [1993]

Intrinsic aids include any portion of the statute that defines terms or relates to any special meaning being given to everyday words. In addition, there are three latin phrases that give guidance on how lists of words should be interpreted:

  • Eiusdem Generis (sometimes spelled ejusdem generis) is the “same kind or nature” rule. A general word following two or more specifics will refer only to the same type of things as the specifics.
  • Noscitur A Sociis is the “recognition by associated words” rule. The meaning of a specific word is determined by the nature of the surrounding words.
  • Expressio Unius est Exclusio Alterius (“expressing one thing excludes others”). Mention of one or more specifics without an accompanying general word implies that the specifics are the limit of the statute’s coverage.

The interpretation of statutes is a complex area of English law and also an essential one. Without these rules, it would soon become impossible to not only understand the law but even just to apply it, as new situations are always coming to light which Parliament and the courts could not have foreseen when the law was developed.


Cite Term

To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.

Page URL
Modern Language Association (MLA):
Statutory Interpretation. Payroll & Accounting Heaven Ltd. April 07, 2020
Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):
Statutory Interpretation. Payroll & Accounting Heaven Ltd. (accessed: April 07, 2020).
American Psychological Association (APA):
Statutory Interpretation. Retrieved April 07, 2020, from website:

Definition Sources

Definitions for Statutory Interpretation are sourced/syndicated and enhanced from:

  • A Dictionary of Economics (Oxford Quick Reference)
  • Oxford Dictionary Of Accounting
  • Oxford Dictionary Of Business & Management

This glossary post was last updated: 5th March, 2020