The Mischief Rule of Statutory Interpretation

The mischief rule of statutory interpretation is the oldest of the rules. The mischief rule was established in Heydon's Case [1584] EWHC Exch J36 Case summary. In Re Sussex Peerage, it was held that the mischief rule should only be applied where there is ambiguity in the statute. Under the mischief rule the court's role is to suppress the mischief the Act is aimed at and advance the remedy.

Case examples of the mischief rule:

 

Smith v Hughes [1960] 1 WLR 830; Case summary     Youtube clip

Royal College of Nursing v DHSS [1981] 2 WLR 279    Case summary

Elliot v Grey [1960] 1 QB 367   Case summary

Corkery v Carpenter [1951] 1 KB 102  Case summary

DPP v Bull [1995] QB 88        Case summary

Disadvantages of the mischief rule 

• Creates a crime after the event eg Smith v Hughes, Elliot v Grey thus infringing the rule of law

• Gives judges a law making role infringing the separation of powers.

•  Judges can bring their own views, sense of morality and prejudices to a case eg Smith v Hughes, DPP v Bull.

Advantages of the mischief rule

• It is a flexible approach allowing the court to avoid injustice

• The mischief rule closes loopholes

• It allows the law to develop and adapt to changing needs eg Royal College of Nursing v DHSS

See also the literal rule and golden rule of statutory interpretation

 Mischief rule of statutory interpretation