The huge benefits of the literal rule is the fact it values the sovereignty of parliament and prevents unelected all judges from making law. Viscount Simmonds contended that it was not really open to judges to fill in gaps, since Lord Denning wanted, or otherwise alter statutes. If a distance was encapsulated then ‘theremedy lies in an Amending Act’ The textual rule as well encourages assurance and because there exists less space for meaning, there is probably be less litigiation.
People know where they stand since the wording will never change. This also the actual law predictable. And lawyers are able to guide their customers on the likely outcome.
Another advantage is that the leads to faster decisions for the reason that answer/outcome are available just by by using a dictionary this means it takes a fraction of the time to find out the results of a circumstance. A disadvantage of the literal rul would be it might lead to ludicrous decisions that clearly had not been wanted simply by parliament if the Act was made an example would be Berriman v London train co – when the partner of a railway maintence employee couldn’t claim for compensation for his death, who have died as they didn’t have a search when he must have, this was because her spouse was only maintaining rather than ‘replacing’ or perhaps ‘relaying’ the tracks. Parliament would have intend for the wife to say. But due to the literal guideline she could not.
Its never possible to word or pharse a great Act to hide every situations e. g. its outlawed to steal nevertheless the literal rule means that didn’t cover stealing your own home. Therefore some circumstances that parilment designed wont end up being covered. One other disadvantage will be that the literal rule presumes that the parilmenty draftsmen will always carry out their careers perfectly every single time, ovbiously this isnt possible as in being human mistakes are produced. For example the law commission in the 1969 survey said “you cannot put emphasis on the literal that means of words and phrases, is to presume an unattainable perfection in draftsmanship”