Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Strict construction requires a judge to apply the text only as it is expressly written, i.e., read perfectly literally. This can contradict the commonly-understood meaning of a law. For example, consider a law that specifies "the use of a knife when committing a crime should be punished by ten years in prison."
Law 275 stipulated a ferry rate of 3-gerah per day on a charterparty between a ship charterer and a shipmaster. Law 276 stipulated a 2 1 ⁄ 2-gerah per day freight rate on a contract of affreightment between a charterer and shipmaster, while Law 277 stipulated a 1 ⁄ 6-shekel per day freight rate for a 60-gur vessel. [5] [6] [4]
As there is always the danger that a particular interpretation may be the equivalent of making law, some judges prefer to adhere to the law's literal wording. Opponents of the plain meaning rule claim that the rule rests on the erroneous assumption that words have a fixed meaning.
Teleological interpretation: considering the purpose of the statute (Latin: ratio legis), as it appears from legislative history, or other observations. It is controversial [citation needed] whether there is a hierarchy between interpretation methods. Germans prefer a "grammatical" (literal) interpretation, because the statutory text has a ...
Textualism is a formalist theory in which the interpretation of the law is based exclusively on the ordinary meaning of the legal text, where no consideration is given to non-textual sources, such as intention of the law when passed, the problem it was intended to remedy, or significant questions regarding the justice or rectitude of the law.
The rule of lenity, also called the rule of strict construction, is a principle in criminal law that requires a court to interpret an ambiguous or unclear criminal statute in the way that is most favorable to the defendant.
The purposive approach (sometimes referred to as purposivism, [1] purposive construction, [2] purposive interpretation, [3] or the modern principle in construction) [4] is an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation under which common law courts interpret an enactment (a statute, part of a statute, or a clause of a constitution) within the context of the law's purpose.
Judicial interpretation is the way in which the judiciary construes the law, particularly constitutional documents, legislation and frequently used vocabulary.This is an important issue in some common law jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia and Canada, because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their legislatures via a process called judicial review.