Literal Approach PDF

Preview

Summary

literal approach assignments...

Description

LI TERALAPPROACH

Li t e r a l a ppr o a c h , a l s okno wna sl i t e r a lr u l e , i son eoft het h r e er u l e so fs t a t ut or y i n t e r p r e t a t i ona ndoneoft heo l de s tme t hod st oi nt e r pr e t i n gs t a t ut e st ha ti sa d op t e db y j u di c i a r yund e rc o mmonl a wr u l e s . Wh e nj ud g e si nt e r pr e tal a w, t he ywoul dc o mmo nl yus e t hel i t e r a lr ul efir s tb e f or eus i n ga n yo t he ra pp r oa c he sofi nt e r pr e t a t i on .Pr i ma r i l y , t hi sr ul e c l a r i fie swha tt hes t a t ut ea c t ua l l ys a y si ns t e a dofe xpl a i ni n gwha ti tmi gh tme a n. To a c c ompl i s ht ha t , t hewo r dsi nt hes t a t ut ewi l lbegi v e ni t sl i t e r a la ndgr a mma t i c a lme a ni n g , t ha ti s , t he i rt e c h ni c a l , pl a i n , s i mpl el a n g ua g ea n dor d i na r yme a ni n g . Mo r e o v e r , t hel a wwi l l b er e a dwo r db ywor da ndwi t hout t ur ni n ga wa yo rc ha n gi n gi t st r ueme a ni n g . Thi sa l s ome a ns t ha ti ns i t ua t i onswhe r et hei nt e r pr e t a t i onl e a dst oa bs u r d i t yo ri n j us t i c eou t c ome , t hec ou r t s woul ds t i l la pp l yl i t e r a lr u l ewha t e v e rt her e s u l ti s . Ther u l ei sf ur t he re x pl a i ne db yLor d De nni n gi nDu por tSt e e lvSi r si n19 80whe nhes a i d :

“Where the meaning of the statutory words is plain and unambiguous it is not then for the judges to invent fancied ambiguities as an excuse for failing to give effect to its plain meaning because they consider the consequences for doing so would be inexpedient, or even unjust or immoral.”

Thel i t e r a lr u l es t a t e st ha tt hebe s t wa yt ofindt hePa r l i a me nt ’ si n t e nt i oni sb yl ooki n g a tt h ena t ur a la ndor d i na r yme a n i n goft hewo r dsu s e di nt hel a w. Si n c et hePa r l i a me nti st he l e g i s l a t ur eoft hec ou nt r y , i tc e r t a i nl ywa nt st hel a wst oo pe r a t ee xa c t l yl i k ewha tt hewor d s s a yi nt hes t a t ut e s . Thed e s i r eoft hePa r l i a me ntwo ul db er e f ut e di fj ud g e sa r ea l l o we dt ogi v e as t r i c t , pr i ma r yme a n i n g ,orn on l i t e r a lme a ni n gt ot hewo r dsi nours t a t ut e sa ndbu i l da v e r s i onoft h e i ro wnofho wt hec a s es ho ul de ndu p.

THEAPPLI CATI ONOFLI TERALAPPROACH I NMALAYSI A The use of literal rule is illustrated in many decided Malaysian cases. One of the cases that adopted literal approach is the case of Wong Pot Heng. In this case, the issue that arose was whether the intention of the legislature can be extended by court as expressed in that regulation by prioritising the depositors immediately after the receivers when facing a clear provision? The statute that was disputed is reg. 13 of the 1986 Regulations which states “All proper costs, charges and expenses, including remuneration, of receivers and other persons appointed under these Regulations shall be payable out of the assets of the deposit taker in priority to all other claims.”. The judge, Mohamed Azmi SCJ stated in his judgement that, regarding reg.13 of the Emergency Regulations, the legislature had made its purpose of the provision crystal clear. He also added that it is no question that the legislature just wants to give their prime concern to the receivers, only to certain people and nobody else. The judge also stated that the legislative must be superior since the terms is of no uncertainty. In the end, the judge held that the learned judge in the previous court had erred in law by ruling that the payment must be given to the depositors as a priority instead of the appellants. From the case, we can see how the judge applied literal approach to the provision of reg. 13 of the Emergency Regulations by interpreting and applying it to the case exactly how the provision says in words without looking at the meaning or purpose behind it. The reason that the judge applied this rule is because the words used are precise and unambiguous, hence they had no other obligation but to adopt the literal approach even if the outcome may appear absurd. According to the judge, since the words are clear-cut, there is no doubt that that was what the legislature intended in reg. 13 of the Emergency Regulations, which is to prioritise only the receivers, certain other people and nobody else. Other than that, the second Malaysian case that applied literal rule is the case of Dr Koay Cheng Boon. The issues in this case were whether Section 31(2) of the Medical Act 1971 and Section 68(1)(d) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 are not consistent with Article 121(1B) of the Federal Constitution and hence void and whether the Court of Appeal has unlimited jurisdiction in hearing an appeal from High Court’s decisions made pursuant to Section 31(1) of the Medical Act 1971?

The judge, Mohd Ghazali FCJ, in his judgement said that the Act is obvious that the intention of the Parliament was no more further appeal from the High Court....