PURPOSIVE RULE OF

INTERPRETATION

LEGAL METHODS
ASSISSNGEMENT

AADHITYA NARAYANAN

L19BALB111
Purposive interpretation of law also called as the “Modern form of interpretation” is a way of
statutory and constitutional interpretation , where common law courts ( India, United
Kingdom, etc) interpret an enactment (a statue , a part of a statue or a clause in the statue)
according to the purpose of its enactment.1 Purposive interpretation is enforced by judges in
courts, it is used when the Law or statue is ambiguous or vague. Judges find the Legislature’s
intention for the purpose of the statue that was passed.
In Inco Europe ltd v First Choice distribution and others 2, the court said that before
interpreting a statue –
• The intended purpose of the statue in question
• That by inadvertence the draftsman and parliament failed to give effect to the purpose
• The substance of the provision the parliament would have made
The purposive approach is explained in the following case law where:-
In the case of Regina v. Secretary of State for Health3,) the court used the purposive approach
to statutory interpretation in order to interpret the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act
1990. The Act had been passed in response to medical developments in fertility treatment. In
July 1978 the first child was born using vitro fertilisation techniques (where the egg is
fertilised outside the mother’s womb). The time at which the Act was passed embryos could
only be created by a process of fertilisation with sperm. After the Act was passed a new
scientific process came to be developed known as cell nuclear replacement (CNR). Under this
process an embryo can be created without fertilising an egg but by removing the nucleus
from one egg and replacing it with another nucleus.
Section 1 (1) (a) of the 1990 act defines a live human embryo where fertilisation is complete.
This was a time where CNR wasn’t even considered as the intent of the legislature could not
have foreseen the development of such a technique. The purposive interpretation of the act is
to protect the live human embryos irrespective of the way the embryos are created and so
CNR falls within the act
The intent of the legislature is seen in the statue where the courts enforce or give meaning to
it. The purpose of the statue could be found from the meaning of the words themselves only
when the law is vague, the problem arises 4
Lord Reid in Black-Clawson international ltd V Papier Werke Waldhof -Aschaffenburg said
the intention not matters but the true meaning of the parliament of what they said matters
However the intention of the parliament lies within the interpretation of the judges, which is a
violation of separation of powers, gives too much power to judges rule of law
While Parliament passes legislation, the courts have to interpret the legislation when applying
it to particular cases. Sometimes the courts can have difficulty in determining what
Parliament intended provisions of the legislation to mean. So the courts have to determine the

1
www. Indianlegalsevice.com
2
(2000) 2 All ER 109
3
[2003] UKHL 13
4
Sussex Peerage case (1884) 8 ER 1034
intention of the parliament for passing such an statue. Usually legislative intent can be seen
by-
1. The text of the bill amendments to the bill which were proposed (accepted and
rejected),
2. Legislative records or journals
3. Speeches and floor debates,
4. Other relevant statues that can be used for definition, limitation of statue
5. Relevant case laws
This can be explained through a case law ( Pepper v Hart 5) where the courts lay down
conditions for reference of Hansard6
The courts laid down three criteria which are to be fulfilled in order to permit reference to
legislative history. They are where
1) legislation is ambiguous or obscure, or leads to an absurdity;
2) the material relied on consists of one or more statements by a minister or other promoter
of the Bill together if necessary with such other parliamentary material as is necessary to
understand such statements and their effect; and
3) the statements relied on are clear. The present case met these three criteria ruling that in
limited circumstances the courts could refer to Hansard.

Conclusion

The purposive interpretation though having advantages like giving judges the power to make
law, to develop the law according to the society and may give judges too much power and
violating the separation of powers, it does has its fair share of drawbacks like judges can
enforce their own ideas , perception in statues as they are the ones giving effect to
parliament’s intention, the intention of the parliament cannot be considered as the parliament
may be divided among its intentions since some may oppose it. It is difficult to say whether
purposive interpretation is really required.

5
[1992] UKHL 3
6
the official report of the debates of both houses of the British Parliament.
 BIBLOGRAPHY

Articles
1. Daniel Mark, Legislative Intent and Purposive Interpretation, oxford university press,
60 Am. J. Juris. 227 (2015)
2. Principles of Legal interpretation by Mark Greenberg
3. Trends in Statutory interpretation and judicial process by Kate Tokeley
4. The Trend towards purposive statutory interpretation By Tobias Lonnquist

Books
1. A purposive approach to labour law by Guy Davidov
2. Legal method by Ian Mcleod, palgrave macmillan, 9th edition
3. Legislative drafting principles and techniques by BR Atre, Universal law
publishing,5th edition

Web sources
1. www.legalseviceindia.com
2. www.britannica.com/
3. catalogue.pearsoned.co.uk
 BIBLOGRAPHY

Journals

1. Kumar Sundaram & M. V. Ramana (2018): India and the Policy of No First Use of
Nuclear Weapons, Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament

2. Rameez Raja, IOSR Journal of Humanities And Social Science, India’s Quest for Power
and Status: A Study of India’s Nuclear Policy, Volume 21, Issue 9, Ver. 13 (Sep. 2016)
PP 01-10

3. Jasjit Singh (2013) India’s Nuclear Policy: The Year After, Strategic Analysis

Web sources

1. www. Economic times.com

2. www. Institute of defence studies and analysis.com

Articles

1. Amit Sharma , Assessing India’s Nuclear Doctrine

2. Rajesh Rajagopalan, India’s Nuclear Policy

3. MOHAMMED B. ALAM, India’s Nuclear Doctrine