Final answer:
Option (D) states that the purposive, literal, and contextual approaches work in conjunction, which is correct as they can be used together to guide the interpretation of the law towards its intended purpose, considering both the literal expressions and contextual framework.
Step-by-step explanation:
The purposive approach to legal interpretation considers the intent behind a law, seeking to understand the purpose that the legislature had in mind. This approach can sometimes contrast with the literal approach, which strictly adheres to the textual language of the statute, regardless of the resulting practical outcomes. However, the purposive approach does not render the literal approach obsolete but can be used complementarily. The contextual approach aids the purposive approach by providing a broader framework for interpretation, considering the societal, cultural, and historical context at the time the law was written. This approach helps avoid anachronistic interpretations that might arise when looking at historical texts without considering their contemporary implications. In the judicial system, judges may use all three approaches simultaneously, interpreting the law with a primary eye towards the intended purpose, while considering the exact words and the surrounding context.
Option (D) is the correct answer as it accurately describes how these approaches interact with one another in judicial interpretation. The three approaches do not work in isolation but are rather part of a dialogue within the legal system that seeks to faithfully interpret and apply laws.