Smith v Hughes (1960)
The mischief rule meant that prostitutes soliciting from balconies and windows were soliciting in a street.
Facts
Section 1 of the Street Offences Act 1959 made it an offence for a common prostitute to loiter or solicit in a street or public place for the purposes of prostitution. Six women were charged under the section. They were not in the street, but were soliciting men in the street from balconies and windows of private houses, by tapping on the windows or calling out to them.
Legal principle
The Divisional Court upheld their convictions. Lord Parker CJ said that the court should consider what mischief the Act was aimed at, which was people being molested or solicited by prostitutes as they walked along the streets. It made no difference whether the prostitute was in the street or in a building, as long as her solicitation was projected to and addressed to people in the street. Applying the mischief rule, the women were soliciting in a street.
Related cases on statutory interpretation
- Adler v George [1964] 2 QB 7
- Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof-Aschaffenburg AG [1975] AC 591
- Corkery v Carpenter [1951] 1 KB 102
- Grey v Pearson (1857) 6 HLC 61
- Heydon's Case (1584) 3 Co Rep 7a
- Inco Europe Ltd v First Choice Distribution [2000] 1 WLR 586
- Jones v Tower Boot Co Ltd [1997] ICR 254
- London and North Eastern Railway Co v Berriman [1946] AC 278
Studying english legal system? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
