Question 1 Word Count: 1,850 You are on a work placement with the Law Commission. The commissioners are considering the current rules of interpretation. During a meeting, the commissioners highlight the following comment by Lord Griffiths in Pepper v Hart  A.C. 593 at 617. “The days have long passed when the courts adopted a strict constructionist view of interpretation which required them to adopt the literal meaning of the language. The courts now adopt a purposive approach which seeks to give effect to the true purpose of legislation and are prepared to look at much extraneous material that bears upon the background against which the legislation was enacted.” You have been asked to prepare an information report covering the following information: 1. Explain the following rules of interpretation – literal, golden, mischief, purposive and the rules of language. 2. Explain the significance of the case of Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart  AC 593 3. Assess whether the purposive approach to statutory interpretation consigned the literal, golden and mischief rules to history? Question 2 Word Count: 650 Your firm is acting on behalf of Paul Moore who wishes to manage this personal affairs of Victor, his best friend. Victor is showing disturbing signs of mental illness. Paul no longer feels that Victor is able to manage his personal affairs and wishes to do so for him. However, Paul is meeting great resistances from a number of people connected to Victor. It should be noted that Victor’s parents and grandparents have died. Victor has a stepmother called Shila, who married his father and began caring for Victor when he was two. Shila is still alive and she regularly meets up with Victor. Victor is an only child, as was his father. His mother had one sister, called Bella. Bella lives in Italy because of her banking job. Bella is married to Frank, who works in London. Their daughter Carly is 18 and lives with her father in London. Frank and Carly regularly travel to Italy to see Bella. Victor and Paul are best friends. They have been sharing a flat in London for six years. They are both single. Victor has never been married and does not have any children of his own. With reference to s26 Mental Health Act 1983 you have been asked to prepare a case note which deals with the following: List the argument available (that is both for and against) the proposition that any of the following should be treated as Victor’s nearest relative and therefore the person entitled to manage Victor’s affairs? You should make it clear what method of interpretation (whether an intrinsic aid and/or extrinsic aid of interpretation (which includes the rules of interpretation and language) you used to create your arguments. 1. Paul 2. Shila 3. Frank 4. Carly When preparing this advice note you should only look at s26 of the Mental Health Act 1983. This is an exercise in analysing words in a statute rather than learning about the procedures used in this area of law.