purposive approach model answer

• A judge using the purposive approach looks at what Parliament wanted to achieve when passing the Act of Parliament. It is similar to the mischief approach but there is a difference as the purposive approach is forward looking, whereas the mischief rule is about looking back at the problem in the common law.
• This approach is most commonly associated with European Law (either EU law or European Human Rights Law). As different countries and languages are involved in drafting EU law a literal translation would be impractical. Lord Denning supported this rule in Bulmer v Bollinger (an EU case) he said: "no longer must they examine the words in meticulous detail... they must look to the purpose or intent of the Act."
• The purposive approach looks at the spirit of the law as opposed to the letter of the law and focuses on what Parliament intended as opposed to the actual words in the statute. In R v Registrar General ex parte Smith a serial killer sought to contact his birth mother after discovering he was adopted. Under the literal rule, he should have been allowed access to this information as the Adoption Act 1876 stated it was his "absolute right". However the judge used the purposive rule and said that it was not Parliament's intention to re-unite serial killers with a vulnerable old lady (his mum).
• In R (on the application of Quintavelle) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, the defendant argued that as Cell Nuclear Replacement (CNR) was not listed under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, it could not be used in the UK, only IVF. However, the courts disagreed and used the purposive approach to interpret the Act. They decided that the purpose of the Act was to cover all embryology rather than just available treatments at the time the Act was passed.