What is the main goal of the mischief rule in statutory interpretation?

The main goal of the mischief rule in statutory interpretation is indeed to prevent the mischief that the statute was designed to address. This rule allows courts to interpret legislation in a way that reflects the intended purpose behind that law, focusing on the "mischief" or problem the statute aims to remedy.

The mischief rule originated from a case in 1584 known as Heydon's Case, where it was established that when interpreting a statute, courts should consider four key elements: what the law was before the statute was enacted, what mischief or defect the statute was intended to remedy, the remedy provided by the statute, and the true meaning of the words used. This approach allows courts to go beyond the literal wording of a statute to determine its purpose and ensure that the law is applied in a way that effectively addresses the issue it was created to resolve.

Therefore, this interpretation method seeks not merely to apply law strictly but to achieve justice and practicality by recognizing the legislative intent behind the statute. Other options may suggest clarity, fairness, or strict adherence, but these do not specifically capture the essence of addressing the mischief that the law aims to remedy, which is the core focus of the mischief rule.