How is The Golden Rule applied?

The Golden Rule is applied to prevent illogical or inconsistent interpretations of a legal Act when a literal reading would produce such a result.

Application of the Golden Rule

The Golden Rule aims to modify the literal rule of statutory interpretation. It acknowledges that sometimes, words, when interpreted plainly, can lead to an absurd outcome that the legislator likely did not intend. The rule is applied to avoid such outcomes.

• Purpose: To avoid absurdity or inconsistency in interpreting legislation.

• Trigger: A literal interpretation leading to an absurd or inconsistent result.

• Mechanism: Modifying the literal meaning to achieve a more sensible outcome, presuming the legislator's intent.

Narrow vs. Wide Approach

The Golden Rule can be applied in two ways, depending on the level of absurdity encountered:

1. Narrow Approach:

   • Focus: Choosing between possible meanings of a word.
   • Application: When a word or phrase has multiple possible meanings, the court will select the meaning that avoids an absurd outcome.
   • Reference: According to provided reference material, the court "can only choose between the possible meanings of a word…," if one meaning is apparent, it should be adopted.
   • Example: If a law prohibits vehicles in a park, and "vehicles" could mean only cars or all modes of transportation, the court might interpret it to exclude bicycles to avoid the absurdity of prohibiting bikes while allowing cars.

2. Wide Approach:

   • Focus: Modifying the actual words of the statute.
   • Application: When the literal meaning of a word is clear but leads to absurdity, the court may modify the word to achieve a sensible outcome that reflects legislative intent.
   • Example: Consider a law stating "No person shall be allowed to enter without paying a fee." Interpreting this literally would mean even employees could not enter without paying, which is absurd. The court might imply an exception for employees.

Example Scenarios

To better illustrate the application, consider these examples:

• A law states that a person convicted of a crime should be fined "$10 or imprisoned." A literal reading suggests the court could choose either, even imprisoning someone without a fine. Applying the Golden Rule, the court would likely interpret it as "$10 and imprisoned" to avoid the absurdity of the current wording.

• If a law prohibits "animals" in a restaurant, does it apply to guide dogs for the blind? A literal interpretation would suggest yes. However, considering the purpose of guide dogs and the absurdity of denying access to visually impaired individuals, the Golden Rule would allow an exception for guide dogs.

Summary Table