# data[].attributes.body
Golden rule for avoiding repugnent result

# data[].attributes.body
The mischief rule

# data[].attributes.body
repugnant literal meaning case → wide approach

# data[].attributes.body
Narrow approach - literal rule, following the dictionary rule

# data[].attributes.body
wide approach

# data[].attributes.body
mischief rule

# data[].attributes.body
Sigma sigma on the wall who’s skibidiest of them all

# data[].attributes.body
narrows down the law and rules based on that

# data[].attributes.body
Ur mommmmm💖

# data[].attributes.body
introduced to avoid absurdity created by the literal rule

# data[].attributes.body
Different because it isnt based of literal meaning of words, follows policy and approach instead.

# data[].attributes.body
To address the absurd decisions that come from applying the literal rule

# data[].attributes.body
golden rule introduced as a middle ground

# data[].attributes.body
Because the golden rule would reduce less absurdity

# data[].attributes.body
To prevent an absurd result

# data[].attributes.body
Whitely v chappell

# data[].attributes.body
Whitely v Chappell

# data[].attributes.body
kelly

# data[].attributes.body
lner v berriman

# data[].attributes.body
whiteley v chappell

# data[].attributes.body
LNER v berriman

# data[].attributes.body
Skibidi rizz club

# data[].attributes.body
LNER v Berrimen

# data[].attributes.body
R v diddy

# data[].attributes.body
To avoid absurd judgementa

# data[].attributes.body
Si needed for following legislation for the correct reasons, if there's a loop hole how can it be counteracted.

# data[].attributes.body
SIGMAAAAAAAAAA

# data[].attributes.body
SI helps guide other courts to a decision that the legislation may not have considered

# data[].attributes.body
golden rule

literal rule

.... rule

need for statutory interpretation - to avoid absurd results and make sure law is applied accurately

# data[].attributes.body
avoid absurdity and make sure the law is certain

# data[].attributes.body
The golden rule, the mischief rule and the literal rule

# data[].attributes.body
Golden, literal & mischief

(Narrow and broad approach)

# data[].attributes.body
To keep law in step with modern society

# data[].attributes.body
Ibsr idk bro

# data[].attributes.body
needed to avoid absurd results

# data[].attributes.body
litetal tule

golden rule

mischief tule

purposive approach

# data[].attributes.body
Golden, literal, mischief, purposive approach

# data[].attributes.body
idk

# data[].attributes.body
per incuriam - a judgement made without reference to a statutory provision

# data[].attributes.body
Stare decisis- where future points of law are determined according to precedent

Persuasive precedent- precedent that is not binding on the court but it may be considered

Courts- Supreme, Appeal, High, Crown, Magistrates

QB- the group of lawyers that sit on the high court

# data[].attributes.body
‘per incuriam’ (‘in error’)

# data[].attributes.body
Skibbidy

# data[].attributes.body
criminal division: magistrates, crown, high court, criminal division of the high court

queens bench: branch of the high court

per incurian- by mistake

# data[].attributes.body
Magistrates, crown, high court (crim divis (family, KBD) CoA (crim) supreme

# data[].attributes.body
queens bench is the criminal high court

# data[].attributes.body
Magistrates and Crown

# data[].attributes.body
In error

# data[].attributes.body
magistrates

crown court

high court [QB]

court of appeal

supreme court

# data[].attributes.body
distinguish

# data[].attributes.body
Per incuriam - in error

# data[].attributes.body
Magistrates, crown, high, appeal, supreme

# data[].attributes.body
made by mistake

# data[].attributes.body
Magistrates courts, crown court, CoA, Supreme Court

# data[].attributes.body
lack of care

# data[].attributes.body
Magistrates, crown, court of appeal, supreme

# data[].attributes.body
a division

# data[].attributes.body
queens bench

# data[].attributes.body
Persuasive precedent: precedent set by courts that are not binding but can be used convincingly

# data[].attributes.body
stare decisis- stand by the decision made

# data[].attributes.body
doctrine of precedent

persuasive precedent= court is not bound by it, but judges may consider it for future cases and precedent

# data[].attributes.body
Precedent - stare decisis

# data[].attributes.body
Stare decisis – the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent

# data[].attributes.body
It doesnt support parliamentry sovereignty but as judges have extensive knowledge of the law, they are helping progression.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, in cases where old law is applied they are trying to apply it to modern society

# data[].attributes.body
Due to the sovereignty of Parliament, if they wish to clarify a decision made by a judge they can rewrite the legislation in order to overrule it.

# data[].attributes.body
No because judges have not been elected, so it would be unfair

# data[].attributes.body
No since they are unelected and unrepresentative

# data[].attributes.body
undermines parliamentary sovereignty but helpful for society to progress

# data[].attributes.body
yes