Kit question (ELS)

I don’t believe that you have given me the full question in the first part of your post … but here goes with what I’ve got.

Where a judge makes a mistake in his / her decision in a case, and where that decision is binding on subsequent cases in courts of the same or lower standing, then that mistake is carried on under the principle of binding precedent. It’s only when a similar case later is being heard by a court of higher standing that that earlier mistake can be corrected.

No, mischief rule and the purposive approach are not the same thing. The purposive approach focuses on the underlying purpose or intention of the legislation rather than just the literal meaning of the words.

It thus allows the courts to interpret statute in a way that best achieves the legislative objective, even if it means departing from the literal meaning of the words.

The purposive approach takes into account not only the mischief that it addresses but also the context and legislative history that the legislation was intended to address.

OK?

If you accept that statute law is intended to address issues as they arise, those issues may have arisen as a result of some ‘mischief’, as a result of changing mores in society or simply a need to formalise some previous informal branch of mercantile law.

As a general statement, the purposive approach looks to determine what it was that initiated the process of creating the statute.

If you want to particularise that this involves only two elements (mischief and context) then ok. Personally, I would leave the gate open to allow other objectives to be included as and when appropriate.

OK?