Statutory Interpretation: KK7

statutory interpretation

• statutory interpretation is the process undertaken by judges to give meaning and apply words of an Act of Parliament to specific situations

• does not change the actual words or phrases in the statute itself, just their meaning

reasons for statutory interpretation

there are two broad reasons for why courts are required to interpret legislation:

• resolving problems that occur during the drafting process of the bill

  • the bill might not have taken future circumstances into account

  • the intention of the bill might not have been clearly expressed

  • mistakes in the drafting of a bill

• resolving problems that occur during the application of statues

  • most legislation is drafted in general terms

  • the act may no longer reflect community views and values

  • the meaning of words may be ambiguous

  • the act might be silent on an issue and the courts may need to fill gaps in the legislation

  • the meaning of words can change over time

broad reason #1 - resolving problems that occur during the drafting process of the bill

• drafting bills can be a complex task

• the complexities involved in drafting mean that inevitably some terms and phrases used will be unclear and in need of interpretation before they can be applied to resolve a case before court

parliamentary counsel

parliamentary counsel are lawyers who are responsible for drafting bills in accordance with the policies and instructions of a member of parliament

reason - the bill might not have taken future circumstances into account

• the act may need to be clarified as new situations arise

• in the AFP v Luppino, a dispute arose about whether a mobile phone was classified as a ‘computer’ or ‘data storage device’ under the Act

• when the statute was introduced in 2001, the drafters did not consider the possibility of a mobile phone being able to act as a ‘computer’ or ‘data storage device’ in the future

• the court ruled that a mobile phone can be classified as a ‘computer’ or ‘data storage device’ for the purpose of the Act

reason - the intention of the bill might have not been clearly expressed

• sometimes a policy or instructions regarding the purpose of a proposed law may not be clearly expressed

• this can lead to confusion about how it should be interpreted

reason - mistakes drafting the bill

• mistakes may be made when drafting the bill, which may be minor or more technical in nature

• words may have been missed in the text, a heading may not have been properly included, or there may be an issue with punctuation

• for example, gender-specifc words or pronouns may have been used when gender-neutral words or pronouns should have been used. examples s.197 - Arson (crimes act 1958)

resolving problems that occur during the application of statutes

problems that could occur when a court is applying a statue to a particular court case are in the flashcards that follow

reason - most legislation is drafted in broad and general terms

• this is so it can cover a wide range of circumstances

• however, sometimes the terms used are so broad that they need to be interpreted before they can be applied to specific circumstances

• for example in the Deing v Tarola, the court had to determine if wearing a studded belt was an offence under the Control of Weapons Act 1990, which banned the carrying of a ‘regulated weapon’

reason - the Act may have become out of date and no longer reflect community views and values

• over time, community standards and societal values evolve, which may cause Act’s wording to lose its original clarity or relevance

• for example, while each state has laws banning the use of obscene and indecent language in a public place, what is considered ‘offensive’ and ‘indecent’ language changes over time

reason - the meaning of words can change over time

• words like ‘vehicle’, ‘mental illness’ ‘document’ and ‘consent’

• Attorney General v Kevin & Jennifer (2004) - the word ‘man’ was interpreted to include trans men under Marriage Act

reason - meaning of words may be ambiguous

• some words can be unclear or have multiple meanings

• courts need to interpret the words to determine their meaning in relation to the intention of the statute

• AFP v Luppino - meaning of computer was ambiguous as left undefined in the Act

reason - the act might be silent on an issue and the courts may need to fill the gaps in legislation

• a statute tries to cover all situations that might arise in relation to the issues covered in the statue

• may not be possible as some situations may arise that were not foreseen, or gaps may have been left in legislation

• an act may therefore be silent on an issue that comes before the courts

Deing v Tarola Case

• 20 year old man was charged with unlawfully possessed a regulated weapon under the Control of Weapons Act 1990 (Vic) for wearing a studded belt

• original Magistrate’s hearing - magistrate decided a studded belt was a regulated weapon

• Deing appealed the decision

• supreme court allowed the appeal and held that the studded belt was not a regulated weapon

• Supreme Court ruling established a legal precedent that items that are not in common use as a weapon cannot be classed as a weapon under the Control of Weapons Act

effects of statutory interpretation

• the word or phrases contained in the disputed legislation are given meaning

• the court’s decision on the meaning of the legislation is binding on the parties

• a precedent may be set for future cases to follow

• the meaning of the legislation can be restricted or expanded

effect - words or phrases contained in the disputed legislation are given meaning

• words or phrases are clarified & given specific meaning

• allows statute to be applied to resolve the case

• ‘regulated weapon’ is now clarified through the courts interpretation of the act, and does not include a studded belt

  • resulted in Deing’s conviction being squashed

effect - court’s decision on the meaning of the legislation is binding on the parties

parties to the case are bound to the decision of the statute’s meaning until a party lodges a successful appeal against the decision

effect - precedent may be set for future cases to follow

• if interpretation is made by a superior court, the decision forms a precedent that is then read together with the Act to determine the outcome of future cases

• will remain as precedent until it is abrogated or changed by higher court

effect - meaning of the legislation can be restricted or expanded

• if a court interprets a word/phrase narrowly, could restrict the scope of the law

  • for example the decision in deing v tarola restricted the definition of a ‘regulated weapon’

• a broad interpretation of a word or phrase in a statute can extend the meaning of legislation

  • for example, the high court’s broad interpretation of ‘external affairs’
    s. 51(xxix) in tas dam