Literal Rule of Interpretation of Statute

Literal Rule of Interpretation is one of the oldest methods of interpretation adopted by the judiciary. 

The purpose of interpretation is always to find out what the statute stands for, what is the defect it intends to remove and what is remedy it seeks to advance.

In construing statutes the cardinal rule is to construe its provisions literally and grammatically giving the words their ordinary and natural meaning. This rule is also known as the plain meaning rule. 

According to the primary rule, the words, phrases and sentences of a statute are to be understood in their natural, ordinary or popular and grammatical meaning, unless such a construction leads to an absurdity or the statute suggests a different meaning. 

The words 'natural', 'ordinary' and 'popular' are used interchangeably. They mean the grammatical or literal meaning, except when there are technical work.

Every word in the law should be given meaning as no word is unnecessarily used.

One should not presume any omissions and if a word is not there in the Statue, it shall not be given any meaning.  

The first and most elementary rule of construction is that the words and phrases of technical legislation are used in their technical meaning if they have acquired one, and otherwise in their ordinary meaning, and the second is that the phrases and sentences are to be construed according to the grammar rule.

No judge can deviate from the meaning of the statute though decision maybe unjust. The words of a statute must prima facie be given their ordinary meaning.

The literal rule accepts the supremacy of the Parliament: the right to make laws, even though sometimes, they seem absurd. In the literal rule of interpretation, there is no contrary meaning within the statute.

Where there is no ambiguity in words, the question of intention ought not to be admitted. The words are plain and clear under the literal rule. The literal rule helps the judge in administering justice in a neutral manner.

When the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous it is not necessary to look into the legislative intent or object of the Act. The literal rule puts a virtual boundary upon the judges from not deviating from the ordinary or literal meaning of the words used in the statute.

If there is nothing to modify, alter or qualify the language which the statue contains, it must be construed in the ordinary and natural meaning of the words and sentences. Nothing is to be added to or taken from a statue unless there are adequate grounds to justify the interference. 

-- Dr. Deepak Miglani

Email id:- legalbuddy@gmail.com