Statutory interpretation

• Whiteley V Chappell (Literal rule)

  Offense to impersonate an entitled person to vote. Defendant pretended to be a person who was on list but died. Court said they were not guilty as you can't impersonate a dead person.
• Alder V George ( Broad approach)

  Convicted of obstructing in the vicinity of a prohibited place. Appealed since he claimed he was in the prohibited place not in its vicinity.
• Smith V Hughes (Mischief rule)

  Street offences act 1959 states its an offence for a prostitute to loiter in streets for the purpose of prostitution. 6 different women convicted guilty - 1 on balcony others on ground floor rooms attracting men attention.
• R V Registrar General - Ex Parte Smith

  Smith was criminally insane and killed twice, was adopted as a baby and wanted to obtain his birth records provided by Adoption act 1976 which gives him right. He was denied access as parliament was concerned he would harm his mother.
• Heydon's case

  1. What was the common law before the act passed?

  2. What was the mischief for which common law did not provide?

  3. What remedy does the act attempt to provide to cure the defect?

  4. What is the true reason for the remedy?
• Allen (Narrow approach)

  Defendant remarried but marriage would have been void as woman was niece of first wife. Allen argued not guilty as married void but court decided being married meant "being validly married" but that "shall marry" meant "go through marriage ceremony" which Allen did