What does the golden rule of statutory interpretation aim to address?

The golden rule of statutory interpretation specifically aims to address the potential for absurd results that may arise from a strict application of the literal rule. When judges apply the literal rule, they interpret the words of a statute in their most ordinary meaning, even if this leads to outcomes that are nonsensical or produces results that are contrary to the intentions of the legislature. The golden rule serves as a modification of this approach by allowing judges to depart from the literal meaning of the words in a statute to prevent any absurdity or injustice that may ensue from such an interpretation. Essentially, it provides a balance between adhering to the text of the law and ensuring that the law functions effectively and justly in practice. This principle underscores the importance of maintaining the purpose of legislation while still respecting its language.

In contrast, the other options either do not accurately reflect the function of the golden rule or address aspects that are not its primary focus. The golden rule does not exclusively promote literal interpretation, nor does it directly involve questions of judicial discretion outside of preventing absurdity. Additionally, it firmly upholds legislative intent rather than seeking to avoid it entirely. This distinction emphasizes how the golden rule seeks to ensure that the spirit of the law is preserved while navigating the complexities of language in