Ambiguity in Legal Drafting: How Courts Resolve Linguistic Uncertainty

---

Language is the foundation of law. Every statute, contract, or legal notice is built upon words — and yet, words can be slippery. The same phrase may carry different meanings depending on who reads it, when, and in what context. This is known as ambiguity in legal drafting. While legal drafters aim for precision, complete clarity is rarely possible. Ambiguity in legal texts often leads to disputes, forcing courts to interpret what the legislature or the parties truly intended.

Interpretation isn’t just about grammar — it’s about justice, context, and clarity.

This article explores how courts handle linguistic uncertainty through established principles of legal interpretation, focusing on examples from Indian jurisprudence.

Can one word change the meaning of a law? Discover how courts decode ambiguity.

What is Ambiguity in Legal Drafting?

In simple terms, ambiguity arises when a word, phrase, or sentence can be understood in more than one way. In legal drafting, ambiguity can be:

1. Semantic Ambiguity – where a word itself has multiple meanings.
   Example: The word “bank” can mean a financial institution or the edge of a river.
2. Syntactic Ambiguity – where the structure of the sentence allows different interpretations.
   Example: “He shot the robber with the gun” — Did he use the gun, or did the robber have it?
3. Contextual Ambiguity – when the meaning changes based on circumstances or context.
   Example: The word “reasonable” in “reasonable time” varies with facts and situations.

Ambiguity can result from poor drafting, overuse of technical terms, lack of punctuation, or conflicting provisions within a statute or contract.

🧠 Quick Tip: When reviewing a statute, ask: Could this sentence mean something else if read differently?

Why Ambiguity Matters in Law

The law operates through words, not intentions alone. When the wording of a law or contract is unclear, it can lead to litigation, delayed justice, or even miscarriage of justice.
In statutory law, ambiguity affects the public at large, as people must know what behavior is lawful or unlawful. In contracts, it affects the parties’ rights and liabilities.

Hence, courts play a critical role in resolving ambiguity through well-established interpretative rules and doctrines.

⚖️ Real-World Impact: Ambiguity isn’t just academic — it affects contracts, criminal liability, and constitutional rights.

Judicial Tools to Resolve Ambiguity

When faced with ambiguous language, courts employ several principles of interpretation to uncover the true meaning.

1. Literal Rule (Plain Meaning Rule)

Under this rule, courts give words their ordinary and natural meaning. If the language is clear, there is no need to interpret.
Case Example: State of Haryana v. S.L. Arora & Co. (2010) 3 SCC 690 – The Supreme Court held that when the words are plain, they must be given effect regardless of the consequences.

However, literal interpretation may sometimes produce absurd results, leading courts to adopt other rules.

2. Golden Rule

This rule allows a departure from the literal meaning to avoid absurdity or inconsistency.
Case Example: Grey v. Pearson (1857) 6 H.L. Cas. 61 – Lord Wensleydale explained that the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words should be adhered to unless it leads to absurdity.

Indian Example: M. Pentiah v. Veeramallappa Muddala (1961 AIR 1107) – The court applied the golden rule to avoid a construction that would make a statutory provision meaningless.

✍️ Drafting Insight: Avoid constructions that could lead to absurd results — test your sentence with alternate readings.

3. Mischief Rule (Heydon’s Rule)

This rule, derived from Heydon’s Case (1584), looks at the “mischief” or defect in the prior law that the new law intended to remedy.
Case Example: Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1955 AIR 661) – The Supreme Court used the mischief rule to interpret the Constitution’s commerce clause to remove earlier legal confusion.

This approach helps the court identify the legislative intent and ensures that the interpretation promotes the statute’s purpose.

🧩 Exam Tip: Always identify the legal mischief the statute aims to cure — this reveals legislative intent.

4. Rule of Harmonious Construction

When two provisions conflict, courts try to read them harmoniously to give effect to both.
Case Example: Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore (1958 AIR 255) – The Supreme Court harmonized the rights of religious denominations with the State’s power to ensure social welfare.

This rule is vital in resolving ambiguity between conflicting statutory clauses.

📚 Interpretation Toolkit: Courts don’t guess — they apply structured rules to decode unclear language.

When One Word Changes Everything

Courts have often observed how a single word can alter the entire legal outcome.

• In contracts: The difference between “shall” and “may” can determine whether a party’s obligation is mandatory or discretionary.
  Example: In Bachhittar Singh v. State of Punjab (1962 AIR 395), the Supreme Court interpreted “shall” as mandatory due to the legislative intent.
• In criminal law: The word “knowledge” versus “intention” changes the degree of guilt.
  Example: State of Maharashtra v. M.H. George (1965 AIR 722) – The distinction between the two affected the criminal liability under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.
• In constitutional interpretation: The difference between “and” and “or” has led to landmark judgments. Courts often interpret “and” as “or” to avoid absurdity, depending on legislative intent.

Thus, courts not only look at the dictionary meaning of words but also their purpose, placement, and consequence.

📝 Drafting Checklist:

• Use “shall” only for mandatory duties.
• Avoid vague terms like “reasonable” unless contextually defined.
• Clarify mental states —“knowledge” vs “intention.”`

The Principle of “Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat”

A Latin maxim meaning “it is better for a thing to have effect than to be void.”
Courts apply this principle to ensure that a statute or document is interpreted to make sense, not to render it meaningless. This helps preserve the drafter’s intent even if the language is imperfect.

Modern Challenges in Legal Drafting

With the rise of digital communication, international treaties, and AI-assisted drafting, ambiguity is becoming more complex. Laws now use terms like “reasonable”, “significant impact”, or “digital harm”, which are inherently open-ended.
Thus, clarity in drafting is more critical than ever. Modern legal education emphasizes plain English drafting while maintaining legal precision.

🌐 Digital Era Tip: Use plain English and define emerging terms like “digital harm” or “significant impact.”

Conclusion

Ambiguity in legal drafting is both unavoidable and manageable. While legal drafters must strive for clarity, it is ultimately the judiciary’s interpretive wisdom that breathes life into the law. Courts, through rules like the literal, golden, and mischief rules, bridge the gap between language and justice.

A single misplaced word can spark years of litigation, but careful interpretation can restore the spirit of the law. As Justice Holmes once said, “A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and time.”

---

References

1. Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar, AIR 1955 SC 661.
2. State of Haryana v. S.L. Arora & Co., (2010) 3 SCC 690.
3. M. Pentiah v. Veeramallappa Muddala, AIR 1961 SC 1107.
4. Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore, AIR 1958 SC 255.
5. Heydon’s Case (1584) 3 Co. Rep. 7a.
6. Bachhittar Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1962 SC 395.
7. State of Maharashtra v. M.H. George, AIR 1965 SC 722.
8. Maxwell, Interpretation of Statutes, 12th Ed.
9. G.P. Singh, Principles of Statutory Interpretation, LexisNexis, 2023.

#LegalDrafting #StatutoryInterpretation #LegalLanguage #JudicialInterpretation #AmbiguityInLaw #BNSS2023 #LawStudentsIndia #LegalWriting #CourtInterpretation #LawBlog #LawExam #DrGaneshVisavale