purposive approach advantages - model answer

• Evaluation 1:

  One of the main advantages of the purposive approach is that it treats individual cases on a case by case basis. It gives judges scope to decide what the actual aim of parliament was in creating a particular law. This allows for a decision which is relevant to the individual case and which also respects the aim of parliament in passing a particular law.
• Evaluation 1:

  In Maunsell v Olins the court used the purposive approach to decide that a cottage on farm land was premise under the Rents Act 1968. This decision was based on looking at why the Rents Act was created, which was to give better rights to tenants.
• Another advantage is that it takes a modern approach. The purposive approach allows judges to consider technological and societal changes since a law was passed and use these to apply the law in a modern way. In R (on the application of Quintavalle) v HFEA, the law on fertility treatment came from the Human Embryology and Fertilisation Act 1990, which only referenced IVF. The purposive approach allowed judges to still use to Act but apply it in relation to new treatments, without changing the actual law itself.
• The purposive approach also avoids unfair results by allowing a judge the flexibility to interpret the law and deliver a just outcome, this can be applied in future cases to ensure that justice is delivered. In R v Registrar-General Ex Parte Smith, the courts used the purposive approach to refuse Smith contact with his birth mother, as he had killed 2 people. The Adoption Act 1975 didn't specifically mention this issue and under the literal rule, Smith would have been given access. This would have been an unfair and unjust outcome.
• Finally, the purposive approach is beneficial as it fills previously unknown gaps in the law. Obviously, it would not have been parliaments intention to allow loopholes or gaps in the law, so having the power to close these is an advantage. It also saves time for future judges as cases such as Jones v Tower Boot Co (1997), which was dealt with in the Court of Appeal, can set precedent.