Penal statuteStrict constructionHouse of Lords

DPP v Ottewell

[1970] Appeal Cases 64219701 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
Ottewell was charged under a statutory provision. The language of the offence was capable of a wider and narrower reading. Under the wider reading, Ottewell's conduct was caught; under the narrower, it was not.
Issue
Whether ambiguity in a penal statute should be resolved in favour of the prosecution or the accused.
Held
Penal statutes must be strictly construed.
Principle
Penal statutes must be construed strictly in favour of the accused. Where the words of a penal provision are ambiguous, the construction less burdensome to the accused must be preferred. The court cannot extend penal liability by strained interpretation.
Cite this

Facts

  • Ottewell was charged under a statutory provision
  • The language of the offence was capable of a wider and narrower reading
  • Under the wider reading, Ottewell's conduct was caught; under the narrower, it was not
  • Crown argued the purposive/wider reading should apply

Issue

  1. Whether ambiguity in a penal statute should be resolved in favour of the prosecution or the accused.

Held

  • Penal statutes must be strictly construed
  • Where two constructions are reasonably possible, the one favouring the accused prevails
  • The state may not restrict liberty on an ambiguous text
  • Accused acquitted

Ratio decidendi

A penal statute must be construed strictly. If after employing all legitimate aids of interpretation the language remains ambiguous, the ambiguity must be resolved in favour of the person against whom the penalty would be imposed.

Exam use

How to use it in an answer

  • English authority for strict construction of penal statutes
  • Paired with Mayer Hans George (1965) for Indian position
  • Key line: "In DPP v. Ottewell (1970), the House of Lords held that where a penal provision is ambiguous, the construction less burdensome to the accused must be adopted."

Cite this

Citation

DPP v. Ottewell [1970] Appeal Cases 642

Reported: [1970] AC 642. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.