## Rule of Reasonable Construction

Also called the Golden Rule of Interpretation, this rule operates as a check on the rigid Literal Rule. It allows the court to depart from the dictionary meaning when literal construction would yield an unfair, unreasonable, or absurd result.

### Core Principle

> If giving the plain meaning would not be fair or reasonable, it is the duty of the court to depart from the dictionary meaning and adopt a construction which advances the remedy and suppresses the mischief — provided the court does not have to resort to conjecture.

### Key Sub-Rules

1. Purpose-Furthering Construction Preferred

An interpretation which furthers the object of the statute is preferred over one which is likely to defeat the object.

2. Golden Rule — Avoid Absurdity

If grammatical interpretation leads to absurdity, it is permissible to depart from the grammatical sense — but only to the extent of avoiding the absurdity and no further.

3. Sensible Meaning

Words of a statute must lead to a sensible meaning rather than nullity.

### Two Important Latin Maxims

Maxim	Translation	Effect
Ut res magis valeat quam pereat	'That the thing may rather have effect than perish'	Words shall lead to a sensible meaning.
Interpretatio fienda est ut res magis valeat quam pereat	'Interpretation should be such that the thing has effect rather than be made futile'	Words must be construed to give EFFECT to the enactment rather than reduce it to futility.

### Constraint — No Conjecture

The court may depart from literal meaning only where reasonableness so demands. It cannot rewrite the statute based on speculation or what it thinks the legislature 'should have' said.

Worked example

### Example 1

Example 1 — Golden Rule applied:

A statute reads 'It shall be unlawful to be in possession of any altered passport.' Literally, a person carrying back his own passport that was altered by an immigration officer would be guilty. The court reads it reasonably to mean 'fraudulently altered' to avoid the absurd result — but goes no further than that.

### Example 2

Example 2 — Purpose-furthering construction:

A welfare statute providing protection to 'workmen' where one interpretation excludes a category of employees that the statute clearly intended to protect — the court adopts the broader interpretation to advance the object of the welfare legislation.

### Example 3

Example 3 — Ut res magis valeat quam pereat:

If a section can be read in two ways — one making the section operative and meaningful, the other rendering it useless or contradictory — the court adopts the operative reading so the provision survives rather than perishes.

⚠️ Common exam mistakes

Confusing the Golden Rule with the Mischief Rule — Golden Rule modifies the literal meaning to avoid absurdity; Mischief Rule looks at pre-existing law and the defect being remedied.
Going BEYOND what is needed to remove absurdity — the rule limits departure to exactly what is necessary.
Engaging in conjecture/speculation about legislative intent — the court must find reasonable construction from the text, not invent intent.
Misquoting the maxims — note 'Ut res magis valeat quam pereat' is short form; the fuller version begins with 'Interpretatio fienda est'.

Reference:

Now that you've read this — what's next?

Move from understanding → mastery in 3 clicks. Each option below picks up from this lesson's topic.

🔥 Drill 5 Qs on this → ✍️ Adaptive practice →

Rule of Reasonable Construction (Golden Rule)

Worked example

⚠️ Common exam mistakes