Explore the intricacies of interpreting statutes with this comprehensive analysis of rules, including the literal rule, reasonable construction, harmonious construction, Haydon’s rule, and more. Master statutory interpretation for accurate legal analysis and compliance.
The primary rules of construction play a crucial role in interpreting statutes and legal provisions. These rules guide judges and legal professionals in understanding the intent and meaning behind legislative enactments. The literal rule of construction, also known as the entry gate to construction, is the first and primary rule of construction. It emphasizes that provisions must be construed literally and grammatically, giving them their ordinary meaning. This article explores the literal rule of construction and other important rules, such as the rule of reasonable construction, rule of harmonious construction, Haydon’s rule, rule of beneficial construction, rule of exceptional construction, and various secondary rules of interpretation.
PRIMARY RULES OF CONSTRUCTION
Literal Rule of Construction
1. It is also known as Entry gate to Construction as it is first and Primary rule of Construction.
2. It is a cardinal rule of construction that provisions must be construed literally and grammatically giving them their ordinary meaning.
3. When the words in a statute are in themselves clear they must be understood in their ordinary and natural sense and no other hypothetical construction shall be derived. This principle is contained in the Latin maxim “absoluta sententia expositore non indiget”. In other words, plain words require no explanation.
4. Narrower vs. Wider meaning
Sometimes it may so happen that a choice has to be made between two interpretations- one narrower and other one wider, in such a situation, if the narrower interpretation would fail to achieve the manifest purpose of the legislation, one should adopt the wider one.
Example-
‘The nature of concern or interest, financial or otherwise’ of a director or the manager of a company in the subject-matter of a proposed motion (as referred to in section 102 of the Companies Act, 2013), we have to make a broader interpretation of Any concern or interest so that all material facts could be disclosed to the shareholders. Here, if a narrower interpretation is made, the very purpose of the provisions of this section will defeat as the directors will end up disclosing their interest in a very restricted manner, what is required here is a full and frank disclosure of the interest of directors, i.e. even relatives of directors are interested, that too shall be disclosed.
5. Natural and Grammatical Meaning-
Statutes should be first understood in their natural, ordinary and popular sense and only if there is any inconsistency with the intention of the statute then such grammatical sense should be modified, extended or abridged to avoid such inconsistency.
Example-
In a question before the court whether the sale of betel leaves was subject to sales tax. The Supreme Court held that betel leaves could not be given the dictionary, technical or botanical meaning when the ordinary and natural meaning is clear and unambiguous. Being the word of everyday use, it must be understood in its popular sense by which people are conversant with it as also the meaning which the statute dealing with the matter would attribute to it. Therefore, the sale of betel leaves was liable to sale tax. (Ramavtar V. Assistant Sales Tax Officer, AIR 1961 SC 1325)
6. Technical words are to be understood in technical sense:
Technical words are understood in the technical sense only.
Example-
In construing the word ‘practice’ in the Supreme Court Advocates Act, 1951, it was observed that practice of law generally involves both acting and pleading on behalf of a litigant party. When legislature confers upon an advocate the right to practice in a court, it is to be understood as authorizing him to appear and plead as well as to act on behalf of suitors in that court. (Ashwini Kumar Ghose V. Arabinda Bose AIR 1952 SC 369)
Rule of Reasonable Construction/Logical Construction
1. According to this Rule, the words of a statute must be construed ‘ut res magis valeat quam pereat’ meaning thereby that words of statute must be construed so as to lead to a sensible meaning.
2.This is also called the Golden Rule of Interpretation.
3. Generally, the words or phrases of a statute are to be given their ordinary meaning, however, if the grammatical meaning leads to absurdity or inconsistency then words are to be interpreted logically to further the object of the enactment.
4. If giving a plain meaning to the words will not be a fair or reasonable construction then construction shall be adopted which will advance the remedy and suppress the mischief taking into account the policy and object of the statute.
Rule of Harmonious Construction
1. The opposite of “harmony” is conflict. Thus, this rule is applied when there is a conflict between two provisions of a statute.
2. The statute must be read as a whole and every provision in the statute must be construed with reference to the context and other clauses in the statute so as to make the statute a consistent enactment and not reduce it to a futility.
3. But where it is not possible to give effect to both the provisions harmoniously, conflict may be avoided by holding that one section which is in conflict with another merely provides for an exception.
A specific rule will override a general rule. This principle is usually expressed by the maxim, “generalia specialibus non derogant”.
In some cases, the statute may give a clear indication as to which provision is subservient and which overrides. This is done by the use of the terms “subject to”, “notwithstanding” and “without prejudice”.
Subject to
The impact of the words “subject to” when used in a provision is that when the same subject matter is covered by that provision and by another provision or enactment subject to which it operates and there is a conflict between them, then the latter will prevail over the former.
Notwithstanding
A clause that begins with the words “notwithstanding anything contained” is called a non-obstante clause. The notwithstanding clause has the effect of making the provision prevail over others.
Without prejudice
When certain particular provisions follow general provisions and when it is stated that the particular provisions are without prejudice to those general provisions the particular provisions shall operate in addition to and not in derogation of the general provisions.
Haydon’s Rule/Mischief Rule
The intention of this rule is always to make such construction as shall suppress the mischief and advance the remedy according to the true intention of the legislation.
Four things are to be considered while applying this rule:
1. What was the law before the making of the act?
2. What was the defect, mischief, hardship caused by the earlier law?
3. How does the act of Parliament seek to resolve or cure the mischief or deficiency?
4. What are the true reasons for the remedy?
And then the courts shall make such construction as will suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.The mischief rule can be applied only if there is any ambiguity in the present law.
Rule of Beneficial Construction
This is strictly speaking not a rule but a method of interpreting a provision liberally so as to give effect to the declared intention of the legislation.
Beneficial construction will be given to a statute, which brings into effect provisions for improving the conditions of certain classes of people who are under privileged or who have not been treated fairly in the past.
In such cases it is permissible to give an extended meaning to words or clauses in enactments. But this can only be done when two constructions are reasonably possible and not when the words in a statute are quite unequivocal.
Rule of Exceptional Construction
“And” and “Or”
1. The word “and” is normally conjunctive. It is used to conjoin words, clauses or sentences.
2. The word “or” is a disjunctive particle that marks an alternative, generally corresponding to “either”, as “either this or that”.
3. The word “and” is normally conjunctive, while “or” is disjunctive.
4. But sometimes “and” is read as “or” and vice versa to give effect to the manifest intention of the legislature. (Municipal Council Vs. Bishandas Nathumal AIR 1969 MP 147).
5. “And” may legitimately be construed as “or” when the intention of the legislature is clear and when any other construction would tend to defeat such intention. (Amulya Chandra Roy Vs. Pashupathi Nath AIR 1951 Cal 48).
“May”, “Must” and “Shall”
May
1. ‘May’ signifies permission and implies that the authority has been allowed discretion.
2. “May” though permissive sometimes has compulsory force and is to be read as shall.
3. Where the word ‘may’ has been used as implying a condition to be fulfilled, in such a case the word ‘may’ will have a compulsory force.
4. When any authority or body has a power given to it by the word ‘may’ it becomes its duty to exercise that power and it will be read as shall.
Shall:
1. “Shall” though mandatory is to be read as may.
2. It is well – settled that the use of the word ‘shall’ does not always mean that the enactment is mandatory; it depends upon the context in which the word ‘shall’ occurs and the other circumstances.
3. The question whether any requirement is mandatory or directory has to be decided on the purpose for which the requirement has been enacted, particularly in the context of the other provisions of the Act and the general scheme thereof.
Rule of Ejusdem Generis
Where specific words pertaining to a class or category or genus are followed by general words, the general words shall be construed as limited to the things of the same kind as those specified.
This rule applies when:
1. The statute contains an enumeration of specific words
2. The subject of enumeration constitutes a class or category;
3. That class or category is not exhausted by the enumeration
4. General terms follow the enumeration; and
5. 5. There is no indication of a different legislative intent.
Exceptions:
1. If the preceding term is general, as well as that which follows this rule cannot be applied.
2. Where the particular words exhaust the whole genus.
3. Where the specific objects enumerated are essentially diverse in character.
4. Where there is an express intention of legislature that the general term shall not be read ejusdem generis the specific terms.
The fifth ground contained in Section 271 (e) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall not be read ejusdem generis the earlier five although it is a general phrase following specific phrases.
OTHER (SECONDARY) RULES OF INTERPRETATION
|
Doctrine of Noscitur a Sociis |
Noscitur a Sociis means that when two or more words that are susceptible of similar meaning then they take their colour from each other, that is the meaning of the more general word being restricted to a sense analogous to that of the less general. |
| Fresh orange juice is not a fruit juice.
While dealing with a Purchase Tax Act, which used the expression “manufactured beverages including fruit-juices and bottled waters and syrups”. It was held that the description ‘fruit juices’ as occurring therein should be construed in the context of the preceding words and that orange-juice unsweetened and freshly pressed was not within the description. (Commissioners. Vs. Savoy Hotel, (1966) 2 All. E.R. 299) |
|
| Doctrine of Contemporanea Expositio | 1. This doctrine is based on the concept that a statute is to be interpreted by referring to the explanation it has received from contemporary authority.
2. The maxim “Contemporanea Expositio est optima et fortissinia in lege” means “contemporaneous exposition is the best and strongest in the law.” This means a law should be understood in the sense in which it was understood at the time when it was passed. 3. The maxim “optima legum interpres est consuetude” simply means, “Custom is the best interpreter of law”. 4. But remember that this maxim is to be applied for construing ancient statutes, but not to acts that are comparatively modern. |
INTERNAL AIDS TO INTERPRETATION/ CONSTRUCTION
|
Long Title |
1. An enactment would have what is known as a ‘Short Title’ and also a ‘Long Title’.
2. The ‘Short Title’ merely identifies the enactment and is chosen merely for convenience. 3. The ‘Long Title’ on the other hand, describes the enactment and does not merely identify it. 4. We can, therefore, refer to it to ascertain the object, scope and purpose of the Act and so is admissible as an aid to its construction. 5. Although it cannot override the clear meaning of the enactment. Full title of the Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act, 1951 specify that this is an Act to authorize Advocates of the Supreme Court to practice as of right in any High Court. |
| Preamble | 1. The Preamble expresses the scope, object and purpose of the Act more comprehensively than the Long Title.
2. The Preamble may recite the cause of making a statute and the evil which it seeks to remove. 3. Like the Long Title, the Preamble of a Statute is a part of the enactment and can be used for construing it. 4. However, the Preamble does not over-ride the plain provision of the Act but if the wording of the statute gives rise to doubts as to its proper construction the Preamble can be referred to in order to arrive at the proper construction. Example-a marriage between a Christian male and a Hindu female solemnized under the Hindu Marriage Act was considered as void. This result reached also having regard to the preamble of the Act which reads: ‘An Act to amend and codify the law relating to marriage among Hindus’ (Gullipoli Sowria Raj V. Bandaru Pavani) |
| Heading and Title of a Chapter | 1. The headings of different portions of a Statute can be referred to determine the sense of any doubtful expression.
2. They cannot control the plain meaning of the words of the enactment though, they may, in some cases be looked at if there is any ambiguity in the meaning of the sections. 3. It may be noted that headings may sometimes be referred to know the scope of a section in the same way as the preamble. 4. But a heading cannot control or override a section. |
| Marginal Notes | 1. Marginal notes are summaries and side notes at the side of a section or group of sections in an act.
2. They are not a part of the enactment, for they were not present when the Act was passed in Parliament, but inserted after the act has been so passed. 3. Hence, they are not an aid to construction. 4. However, marginal notes appended to Articles of the Constitution have been held to be part of the Constitution as passed by the Constituent Assembly and therefore have been used in construing the Articles. |
| Definitional Sections/Interpretation Clauses | The purpose of a definition clause is two-fold:
(i) To provide a key to the proper interpretation of the enactment, and (ii) To shorten the language of the enacting part by avoiding repetition of the same words contained in the definition part every time the legislature wants to refer to the expressions contained in the definition. |
| Restrictive and extensive definitions:
1. When a word is defined to ‘mean’ such and such, the definition is ‘prima facie’ restrictive and exhaustive we must restrict the meaning of the word to that given in the definition section. 2. But where the word is defined to ‘include’ such and such, the definition is ‘prima facie’ extensive: here the word defined is not restricted to the meaning assigned to it but has extensive meaning which also includes the meaning assigned to it in the definition section. 3. Where a word being defined as ‘means and includes’ such and such, the definition would be exhaustive. 4. On the other hand, if the word is defined ‘to apply to and include’, the definition is understood as extensive. |
|
| Ambiguous definitions:
Sometimes, the definition section may itself be ambiguous, and so it may have to be interpreted in the light of the other provisions of the Act and having regard to the ordinary meaning of the word defined. |
|
| Definitions subject to a contrary context:
When a word is defined to bear a number of inclusive meanings, the sense in which the word is used in a particular provision must be ascertained from the context and intention of the Act. |
|
| Illustrations | 1. Many, though not all, sections have illustrations appended to them.
2. These illustrations follow the text of the Sections and, therefore, do not form a part of the Sections. However, illustrations do form a part of the statute. 3. Illustrations cannot have the effect of modifying the language of the section and can neither curtail nor expand the ambit of the section. |
| Proviso
Distinction between Proviso, exception and Saving Clause |
1. The normal function of a proviso is to except something out of the enactment or to qualify something stated in the enactment which would be within its purview if the proviso were not there.
2. Provisos that are so included begin with the words, “provided that”. 3. Usually, a proviso is embedded in the main body of the section and becomes an integral part of it. |
| 1. ‘Exception’ is intended to restrain the enacting clause to particular cases.
2. ‘Proviso’ is used to remove special cases from general enactment and provide for them specially 3. ‘Saving clause’ is used to preserve from destruction certain rights, remedies or privileges already existing. |
|
| Explanation | 1. An Explanation is at times appended to a section to explain the meaning of certain words or phrases used in the section.
2. An Explanation should be read as to clear up any ambiguity in the main section. It should not be so construed as to widen the ambit of the section. |
| Objects of an explanation to a statutory provision:
(i) Explain the meaning and intendment of the Act itself. (ii) Clarify any obscurity and vagueness (if any) in the main enactment to make it consistent with the object. (iii) Provide an additional support to the object of the Act to make it meaningful and purposeful. (iv) Fill up the gap which is relevant for the purpose of the explanation to suppress the mischief and advance the object of the Act. (v) Cannot take away a statutory right. |
|
| Schedules | 1. The Schedules form part of an Act. Therefore, they must be read together with the Act for all purposes of construction.
2. However, the expressions in the Schedule cannot control or prevail over the expression in the enactment. 3. If there appears to be any inconsistency between the schedule and the enactment, the enactment shall always prevail. 4. For example, schedules appended to the Companies Act, 2013, to the Constitution of India |
| Read the Statute as a whole | 1. It is the elementary principle that the construction of a statute is to be made of all its parts taken together and not of one part only.
2. The deed must be read as a whole in order to ascertain the true meaning of its several clauses, and the words of each clause should be so interpreted as to bring them into harmony with other provisions. |
EXTERNAL AIDS TO INTERPRETATION/ CONSTRUCTION
|
Historical Setting |
The history of the external circumstances which led to the enactment in question is of much importance in construing any enactment.
History in general and Parliamentary History in particular, ancient statutes, contemporary or other authentic works and writings all are relevant in interpreting and construing an Act. We have also to consider whether the statute in question was intended to alter the law or leave it where it stood before. |
| Consolidating Statutes & Previous Law | The Preambles to many statutes contain expressions such as “An Act to consolidate” the previous law, etc. In such a case, the Courts may stick to the presumption that it is not intended to alter the law. They may solve doubtful points in the statute with the aid of such presumption in intention. |
| Usage | 1. Usage is also sometimes taken into consideration in construing an Act.
2. Where the meaning of the language in a statute is doubtful, usage, i.e. how that language has been interpreted over a long period, may determine its true meaning. 3. When a doubtful meaning has, for several years, received an interpretation which has generally been acted upon by the public, the Courts should be very unwilling to change that interpretation, unless they see cogent reasons for doing so. |
| Earlier & Later Acts and Analogous Acts | 1. Where there are different statutes in ‘pari materia’ (on similar subject matter), though made at different times, or even expired and not referring to each other, they shall be taken as one composite system.
2. However, if there is some clear discrepancy then it shall be held that the later Act (in point of time) had modified the earlier one. 3. Sometimes, it may so happen that the earlier act may be construed in light of later one. For example, if later act contained that nothing therein should include debentures, in such a case it was held to exclude debentures from the earlier statute as well. 4. Also, later act may be explained by the earlier one, Suppose the earlier bye-law limited the appointment of the chairman of an organisation to a person possessed of certain qualifications and the later bye-law authorises the election of any person to be the chairman of the organisation. In such a case, the later bye-law would be so construed as to harmonise and not to conflict with the earlier bye-law: the expression ‘any person’ used in the later bye-law would be understood to mean only any eligible person who has the requisite qualifications as provided in the earlier bye-law. 5. Where the earlier statute contained a negative provision and the later one merely omits that negative provision. It doesn’t automatically mean that it gives a substantive affirmation of the same. 6. Where a part of an Act has been repealed, it loses its operative force. However, such a repealed part of the Act may still be taken into account for construing the un-repealed part. This is so because it is part of the history of the new Act. |
| Dictionary Definitions | 1. First we have to refer to the Act in question to find out if any particular word or expression is defined in it.
2. Where a word is not defined in the Act itself, dictionaries may be referred to find out the meaning of that word. 3. However, in selecting one out of the several meanings of a word, the context in which it is used in the Act should be taken into consideration. 4. Further, judicial decisions laying down the meaning of words in construing statutes in ‘pari materia’ will have greater weight than the meaning furnished by dictionaries. However, for technical terms reference may be made to technical dictionaries. |
| Use of Foreign Decision | 1. Foreign decisions of countries following the same system of jurisprudence as ours and given on laws similar to ours can be used for construing our own Acts.
2. However, prime importance is always to be given to the language of the Indian statute. 3. Further, where guidance can be obtained from Indian decisions, reference to foreign decisions may become unnecessary. |
RULES OF INTERPRETATION/ CONSTRUCTION OF DEEDS AND DOCUMENTS
|
1. The principle of construction in case of a document and a deed, as of statute, does not differ so much except in some minor details. 2. A deed must be read as a whole in order to ascertain the true meaning of its several clauses and the words of each clause should be so interpreted as to bring them in harmony with other provisions. 3. The golden rule of construction is to ascertain the intention of the parties to the instrument after considering all the words in their ordinary, natural sense. 4. To ascertain this intention the Court has to consider the relevant portion of the document as a whole and also to take into account the circumstances under which the particular words were used. 5. It may also happen that there is a conflict between two or more clauses of the same document. An effort must be made to resolve the conflict by interpreting the clauses so that all the clauses are given effect to. If, however, it is not possible to give effect to all of them, then it is the earlier clause that will over-ride the latter one. |
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the primary rules of construction, including the literal rule, rule of reasonable construction, rule of harmonious construction, Haydon’s rule, rule of beneficial construction, and rule of exceptional construction, are essential tools used by judges and legal professionals to interpret statutes and legal provisions accurately. These rules provide guidance on understanding the ordinary meaning of words, resolving conflicts between provisions, considering the intent of the legislation, and applying specific rules of interpretation when necessary. By adhering to these rules, legal practitioners ensure that justice is served, and the legislative intent is fulfilled. Understanding and applying these rules in legal analysis and interpretation is crucial for maintaining consistency and coherence in the legal system.
Author Bio
