Heydon's Case

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Heydon's Case (1584) ,76 ER 637, Pasch 26 Eliz, plea began 20 Eliz Rot 140, is a landmark case that first used the mischief rule for interpretation. The mischief rule is more flexible than the Golden or Literal rule, the Mischief Rule requires Judges to look over 4 tasks to ensure that gaps within the law are covered.

Lord Coke described the process through which the court must interpret legislation.

For the sure and true interpretation of all statutes in general (be they penal or beneficial, restrictive or enlarging of the common law), four things are to be discerned and considered: (1st). What was the common law before the making of the Act? (2nd). What was the mischief and defect for which the common law did not provide. (3rd). What remedy the Parliament hath resolved and appointed to cure the disease of the commonwealth. And, (4th). The true reason of the remedy; and then the office of all the judges is always to make such construction as shall suppress the mischief, and advance the remedy, and to suppress subtle inventions and evasions for continuance of the mischief, and pro privato commodo, and to add force and life to the cure and remedy, according to the true intent of the makers of the Act, pro bono publico